I LL

N

I S

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

PRODUCTION NOTE
University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign Library
Brittle Books Project, 2009.

_vv

440010

0:'v

zu :'4
'6V

4.

lit"

NAS 9
t#4

Zi
;tit,
'13

_'fe, *
t

Y*ln

ItIitoo

364.13
Oc5t

All

g//

" He who the sword of Heaven will bear
Should be as holy as severe;
Pattern in himself to know
Grace to stand,--Virtue to go :
More nor less to others paying
Than by self-offences weighing."-SHAKESPEARE.

TO THE RIGHT HON. BARON ROLFE.
JUST JUDGE,

Princes may confer titles that perish with the man, and which, while living
mark him only for ridicule, but deeds give distinction that confers an immortality.
In furnishing the country with a verbatim report of every word spoken at the recent
rial of myself and fifty-eight other persons, I am neither actuated by vanity upon my
own part, nor do I use your name with an intention of giving to the proceedings
an undue importance; I am actuated by a much higher motive. We were charged
with the commission of acts perpetrated by others; and while, by the doctrine of
presumption, we should not only have been justified, but were bound to shift
the charge from our own shoulders upon those of the real offenders; yet, for my
own part, I feel satisfied that, jn your capacity of Judge, you were bound to try the
parties before you and them only.
I speak, therefore, 'rather of the manner in which your duty as Judge was'discharged, than of the fashion in which the defendants were charged. Anxious to
push the principles contained in the People's Charter by all the zeal and energy I
possess, and considering myself constitutionally entitled to do so, provided I should
not violate the law, I have nevertheless been constrained upon many occasions to fall
short of my duty to my'arty from a conviction that the law would be strained against
me. You, however, have prescribed the exact limits by which agitation should be
bound, and beyond these limits I will never stray; and I feel satisfied that I may
include the leaders of the chartist party in this bond and covenant. Left wholly
at the mercy of ignorant policemen, partisan magistrates and prejudiced juries,
liable to be operated upon by the colouring of ingenious lawyers and political
judges, it was no inconsiderable advantage to society at large that the law upon this
point should be clearly defined. In Ireland, the land of my birth, the perversion,
of law, and the withholding of justice, lead to acts of savage revenge, which else
would never be committed; and, had the' young mind of England been curbed
by the tight rein of oppression, good men must have shuddered for the consequences.
In Ireland, those deeds of violence are consequences of oppression and misrule;
they are not characteristic of Irishmen, and you " just Judge" must ervr rejoice in

having saved your country from a like infliction, to which mine, fr
causes,
has been most unnaturally subjected.
From an early period of the history of
this country down to the present time, the law has been administered according to
precedents established in those dark days, when judges were the mere minions and
servile slaves of the crown. We have had some bright and honourable exceptions, but
so few, that although their influence lives, and has survived through ages, yet have the
rays shed by their names been obscured and almost lost by the dark clouds thrown
around them by many of their time-serving successors. The law thus laid down, and
long acted upon, is at variance with the living genius of the present times, and man, in
his improved state, calls loudly for a new contract between the laws and the people.
After eight long days of tedious, but not useless or uninteresting inquiry, you have
gone far, if not in establishing a new precedent, at least in explaining the laws as they
stand, so as to be understood by men of the meanest capacity; and herein lies the
great value of the recent investigation. I feel that it would not only be a presumption on my part, but that it would be out of place, to enter here into any discussion
as to the manner in which the several defendants were thrown together, charged
with separate offences, but held responsible for the acts of each other; another opportunity will present itself for such consideration, and therefore, I shall confine
myself to mere comment upon the manner in which your arduous duty as Judge
was discharged. Perhaps there is no situation in which man can be placed, so
important as that of judge, and therefore does it behove, as well those who look
to the laws for protection, as those who may be brought under them for correction,
to canvass with great jealousy the acts of those who are instructed with their administration. In my opinion, Judex " nascitur, non ft." I apply it to the
judge with the same limitation 'that Horace applied it to the poet. He did not
mean that a man without a knowledge of letters, without education, or some
knowledge of man, could be a poet, but he meant that the genius of poetry was born
with him ; so, just Judge, I do not mean that education and a thorough knowledge
the laws of his country, are qualifications which, in a judge, could be dispensed
.,ith, but I do mean to say, that the most indispensable qualification to fit him for
that high office, must be inherent in him. The " unbought grace of life," temper,
the " suaviter in modo," and" fortiter in re," are graces and advantages not to be
acquired, and are, nevertheless, the greatest requisites, as weHl as the greatest ornaments, by which the judgment-seat can be adorned.
Throughout the proceedings we had opportunities of discovering your amiability
of temper, your patience, your activity of mind, and your perfect mastery of your
profession as a lawyer; but it was not until you were called upon to discharge your
duties, in the united characters of man, of lawyer, and of judge, that we could discoler the astounding combination of knowledge, prudence, and honour, :that appeared centered in one man. I confess that I did feel curious to learn what new
ground you could stand upon, after the powerful mind of the Attorney-General
the 'sagacity and research of Mr. Dundas, Mr. Baines, Serjeant Murphy, Mr.
MdOubrey, and Mr. Atherton, and the varied and spirited appeals of the undefended parties, appeared to have exhausted the subject; but I was yet more astonished
that, after all, they appeared only as labourers, who had merely laid the foundation,
and yo were the arohitet to iaise the superstructure. Yes,just Judge, you did take me
by surprise; y ou did discover a combination of all those attributes so essential to the

11iii
complete, the perfect, and the satisfactory administration of the law, that, had I stood
upon trial for my life, and had I received judgment of 'death at your hands, however I
might have. undeserved the law's oppression, I should not have muttered a sentence
against its administration. A just tribute paid to a judge by one who has been fairly
tried and justly convicted before him of the one act of many charged, of which alone
lie was guilty, may be an offeriig tasteless to those who would prefer the character
of yielding a pliant subserviency to the supposed necessity of the times; but if I
have made a correct estimate of your mind, your feelings, and your nature, you
will receive it in that spirit in which it is meant, as the humble offering of a persecuted
individual to one who has, without strained mercy upon the one hand, or without
straining the law against him upon the other hand, taught him where the law protects and when the law should punish. I did do that with which I was chaiged in
the fifth count of the indictment, upon which I was tried, but no more than that
I do most solemnly protest. And, just Judge, my principal motive in undertaking
to lay the proceedings before the public is in order that nothing should be'concealed,
and, above all, that not a sentence, nor even a word, of your luminous, your noble,
your law-protective, your liberty-protecting, your constitutional and truly English'
speech should be lost to the world.
You may, perhaps, be able to bear the further tribute of assurance, that every
defendant felt his liberty secure in your hands, and that, whatever they should
suffer would be but the penalty of any offence they had committed and of that alone;
and they left Lancasfer with an impression, that, having been fairly tried, as far
as the administration of the law was concerned, they were bound in honour to
use no other means than the law, as laid down by'you, sanctions for the advancement
of their principles.
With most profound respect for your unequalled talent, and admiration for your
love of justice, I have the honour to subscribe myself,
JUST JUDGE,
Your most obedient and very respectful Servant,
FEARGUS O'CONNOR.

iG

7

INTRODUCTION.

IT was originally my intention to have prefaced the proceedings at Lancaster,
with an account of the revolution createl by the Corn Law League in August last;
however,upon mature reflection, I have decided upon what I consider to be the more
just and prudent course-; namely,-first, to publish the whole of the evidence,
together with the speeches of counsel and the defendants, and the summing up of
the " Just Judge;" and then, from the lips of the witnesses for the prosecution, added
to such facts as are within my knowledge, to prove irrefutably, not only that the
League did cause the outbreak, but further, that they promoted it with an intention
of driving the people to acts of violence and outrage, in the hope of compelling the
government by force to repeal the " Corn Laws." The last number of the Quarterly
Review, has furnished ample testimhony of the fact;.however, there is a much larger
massof unpublished evidence, which, when submitted to the public, will remove any
doubt that may yet remain as to who the real offenders were, what their intention
was, and how their plans were to 'be carried out. It is now some months since I
announced in the columns of the " Evening Star," the fact that (although Lord
Palmerston was not personally implicated in the diabolical concoctions of the
Corn Law League) many active agents of the whig party decided upon throwing
Lord John Russell-who was a fixed duty man, overboard, and substituting Lord
Palmerston as the leader of the total repeal party. To enter piecemeal into so large
and important a subject, would be ridiculous, and I shall therefore abstain for the
present from further comment; merely stating that I undertake to prove, notwithstanding the virtuous indignation expressed by some of the leaders of the AntiCorn-law Association, that assassination was propounded as a means of effecting their
darling object, and that openly and in the presence of their chairman, and without
a single expression of disapprobation; but, on the contrary, that the proposition was
received with the most unequivocal marks of approbation. I shall abandon this
portion of my subject for the present, and shall now proceed briefly to consider the
elements of which the Anti-corn Law League is composed; the reliance that the
working classes can place on them as a body, and the manner in which they have
hitherto conducted their proceedings. The association is composed principally of
master manufacturers, whose interest it is to buy LABOUR at the cheapest market,
and sell the produce of thelabour at the dearest market; and, however the arithnietical politicians may endeavour to establish an unerring scale with reference to the
price of produce, and the price of labour, yet must every man who has read nature's
book, and who has gathered therefrom the fact, that selfishness is the predominant
feature of our nature, have learned that the excessive mechanical power now at work
in this country, would furnish the owners of that power with the.most ample means
of gratifying that natural propensity, and of breaking down those usual rules, by
which, under ordinary circumstances, reciprocal protection may be rendered
to labour and. capital; or, in other words, how a mutual and creditable
dependency may be made to exist. If there was no more mechanical power
at work than would employ the hands that could be conveniently spared
from other avocations, such referential scale might be established; but, in
our present condition, while the employment of man is considered as an act
of favour by the employer, the mnian is at once deprived of that protection, by which

vi
a fair bargain could be struck. Let us just suppose an extreme case. Suppose a
manufacturing district, with a population of 'say 30,000 hands, and suppose, for
argument sake, that some are now idle, and that the effect of a total repeal of the
Corn Laws would be to give employment to all; and suppose some new improvement in machinery to take place by which 5000, or one-sixth of the 30,000, could be
4dispensed with, in such case the unemployed 5000 hands would c6nstitute a reserve
for the masters to fall back upn, and their destitution would, firstly, place the 25,000
at work wholly at the mercy of their employers; and, secondly, the poverty and
wretchedpess of the unemployed would operate strongly upon those at work, and
would make them submit to, if not satisfied with, their comparative condition. Thus
SI show that, with an overplus of mechanical power, the labourer is deprived of even
a chance of protecting himself against the employer. But then the politicians tell
us that a free trade in corn would at once set allhands going. Nonsense, rank and
insolent nonsense! We have now mechanical power in existence equivalent to
600,000,000 pair of hands; while it is an admitted fact that one in three, or onethird of a population, will manufacture by hand all that the remaining two-thirds can
require; so that we have the power of producing all that eighteen hundred millions
could require, and of only some articles too, while the population of the habitable
globe, falls short of a thousand millions, and while most of the civilized nations,
as. they are called, are daily increasing their means of artificial production. The
League then is composed of the owners of machinery, and machinery is the great,
the monster, enemy of an unrepresented people.
We then come to a consideration of how far the people can rely upon the league as
a body. It must be clear to every sane man that the Reform Bill was forced from the
Tory party by the new-born:influence of the master manufacturers; that with their own
party in power they have for ten years gone on establishing the details by which their
principle of reform was to be made most beneficial to their order. The Poor-law
amendment act, the Corporation reform bill, the Rural police bill, and, above all, the
Tpointment of Whig magistrates, constituted those details, and with the necessary machinery they have gone systematically to work to produce the great anticipated benefit
from a reform in the House ofCommons-a repeal of the Corn-Laws. To insurereform,
they must have had a majority of their party in the House; and to insure a repeal of the
Corn-Laws they mustalso have a majority; anda necessary consequence of aparliamentary majority is the formation of an administration from that party. I would askithen,
after a ten years' experience of those men, while they were merely completing the machinery by which their ascendancy was to be insured and theirfavourite object was to
be achieved, are they just the political party to whose keeping the working classes
would again entrust their affairs ? In whatever fascinating light the, interested
masters, or their hired itinerating hawkers, may place the question of " cheap bread"
before a famishing people, I ask, would they not, if once in power, strain every nerve
and use every means to give to themselves all the advantages arising'from whatis
termed free trade ? Lastly, as to the manner in which they have conducted their
proceedings. With democracy and freedom upon their lips, do we not find them
foremost, as masters, as magistrates, and as jurors, in persecuting all who dare to
etress opinions at variance with those by which they hope to accomplish their
oj~ct,? Do we not find them expending little short of £100,000 initwelve months.
forthe purpose of buying opinion, and yet afraid to meet their very slaves in public
disoussion? Have they dared to publish any account of the expenditure of the
"blood money ?" Have they not, as masters and as magistrates, followed up, persenUted, tortured, and, in many instances.banished from their homes, every individual
whao has taken an active part in exposing their dishonesty and their ignorance ?
Iave they not established the systern of excommunication, byconspiring together, to
Ianish from their employment every man who has taken an1 active part against
then ? Have they not compelled men, women, and children to subscribe to that
fund hy which they hope. to trammel. labour, and for ever to place itunder the
controul of eapital ? Do they. not work your wives 'and daughters to death, whil.,
they compel you to walk the streets in idleness ? Have not your wives petitioned

vii
them over and over again that their husband&s may be allowed. to share their toil,
andf- have they not indignantly refused ? Is it not a notorious fact that the sterm
virtue of your- wives: and daughters is the only guarantee you have fortheir pro
teetion ? And yet with such fearful odds against the workingclasses canithe mind
suggest a greater anomaly than .that glorious oppositionioffered by the unprotected
slaves- to their all powerful oppressors- ?
This opposition, this successful opposition, is most creditable to the working
clases, and has saved this: country from a bloody revolution. Since maehinery and
capital became represented in the House of Commons, the hostility between master
and man has become greater, and greater every year, and this has arisen from the
discovery made by the working classes that, however loud the free-traders were in
their professions, yet was cruelty and a resolution to subjugate labour to capital,
made manifest in their every act, and this circumstance, above all others, has led to
that want of confidence in the Houseof Commons, and which has been daily increasing
from, the moment that machinery shared representation with the land. From that
moment did the terms Whig and Tory lose their distinctive political character, and
from that hour the country has been divided into the two great parties, by whose
interested squabbles the nation is kept in a continuous state of feverish excitement..
The terms Whig and Torycannot be now properly used to distinguish political
parties. Policy and principle have given way- to pride and selfishness, a Whig no
longer means a politician who would resist ° inroads upon the Constitution as,
guaranteed by Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights, and established by the
revohstion of 1688, a Whig now means one who can procure a seat in parliament
upon the pledge that he is a ctsmopolite, and not a mere Englishman; but, however
comprehensive in his philanthropy on the hustings, when invested with the power
of representation, those universal feelings are softened down to the simple thought
of self and factory, and how that living tomb can be worked with cheap labour
And, if not successfully resisted, no circumstance could more tend to the completion
of Whig dishonour and disgrace, than the application of a-League fund'for the pur
pose of returning new-shaded Whigs upon a pledge of supporting fiee-trade.
Every man of common sense must have anticipated some juggle from
a change of name from Whig to Reformer, a Reformer meaning nothing
and being as comprehensive as the pledges of those new fledged politicians, whereas
a Whig, in its political acceptation, conveys the pledge of resisting tyranny andi
every encroachment attempted to be made upon the liberties of the people by the.
Tory party. It was by a surrender of those principles and the ad9ption of'free
trade Malhusianism, that the Whigs lost public confidence, lost their majority, lost:
office, and lost all hope of restoration to power. This trafficking faction was;
dazzled by the moral power exhibited by the free traders for the accomplishment:
of reform, and, instead of discovering that a city or a castle in flames are not true
lights by which public opinion can be tested, they ignorantly supposed that the
same means that conferred. power would preserve power. They were mistakenhowever; Toryism has sprung from the ashes ,of Bristol and Nottingham, and,
Chartism has grown amid the ruins of Whiggery.
Now the people know all these things as well as I do, and mark the result,-"
whereas, some five or six years ago, even the people themselves expected that publiL
speak-ers would bear harder in their addresses upon the Tory party'than upon the
Whigs, now both are allowed to be mixed up in one common mess; so long thenr
a P arliament shall renmin constituted as it now is, we: have to. deal but with its
general- character.
Henceforth, as far as the workirng classes are concerned,
the following is the only consideration to which their minds should be directed.
'Their labour is their only property, and if ve were not to anticipate its fair andi
just representation ina House of Commous, freely chosen by the whole people, and(
if *re were subjected to the dread alternative of submitting to the dominion of one
partyor of the other, then the naked question would present itself as to which of the:
two chas: the most direct interest in subjugating laboar to their will and controule
Whether the landlord, who may employ forty or fifty labourers, and who, in his

vi"

treatment of them will be subjected to some slight controul of public opinion, and
whose conduct, if he treats them badly, may be arraigned in the House of Commons
as an exception to the general rule; or the master who employ' from one thousand
to four thousand, and who, acting with his fellows upon one general rule of
oppression is subject to no controul and liable to no contrast, all being alike engaged
in the one common traffic of buying cheap and selling dear. Then let us look to the
inducements; the man who takes two shillings a week off the wages of each labourer
of fifty, wyould thereby save two hundred and sixty pounds a year, whereas the
man who employs one thousand hands, and who would reduce their wages by two
shillings each, would thereby pocket five thousand two hundred pounds per annum.
A strong inducement that, methinks, to push a trade in labour without reference to
demand and supply.
This is the grievance against which I have ever complained, and it is because I
see no other means of contending against it than the establishment of the small
farm system, that I have so strenuously and so continuously advocated that
system. I do not think that I could select a more fitting opportunity than the
present for briefly submitting my reasons for preferring the small farm system to the
present factory system, as a means of insuring a fair day's wages for a fair day's
work, and which, after all, is the aim and end,of the People's Charter. I never
anticipated that the system could be made so general that the whole working
population shall become farming labourers upon their own account but I do hope
to see it brought into operation sufficiently extensive for the practical carrying out of
one of the doctrines so pompously relied upon by political economists, namely, that
when one channel is closed against labour another channel is opened. Now, I contend for it that no other market fobr labour than the agricultural market can be
opened, and successfully kept open, as a means of providing for that portion of our
population rendered surplus'in the artificial market, either by slackness of trade, or
by new inventions and improvements of mechanical power. Upon a farm a man
can expend his own labour for his own advantage; lie works like a free husbandman
instead of as a serf ; he works at wholesome labour; he works for himself, surrounded
by his family, and becomes daily more attached to his cottage and his spot of ground
which become his bond of loyalty, From the sweat of his brow he can bring up
and educate his family without the dread of becoming a parish pauper, if he is weary
he may rest without the dread of the overseer's knout falling upon his shoulders: if
he is sick he can be comforted in his own bed, in his own house, by his own wife
and his own children, and lie can draw from that store which in halth he laid up
without being thrown upon his parish or his sick club for relief. He dreads not the
sound of the factory bell, he is not haunted during the day with the galling and heartsickening reflection that he is compelled to wander in idleness from beer house to beer
house until the time shall arrive when hewill be called upon to attend at the living tomb
of his infant daughter, and thence to convey her wasted and exhausted little frame
to some loathsome underground cellar, wherein she breathes her last; her place being
supplied by another infant slave, noie to mourn her loss but the slave who begat
her, or the slave that bore her: she was but a simple cog taken from one of the
little wheels of free trade ; she never had been any thing in society, and, had she lived,
she never would be. For fighting her battles the gldrious, the philanthropic, the
tender hearted Oastler has lost his liberty, but has not, I trust, lost it in vain
for fighting her battles Frost well nigh lost his life; and, for continuing the good
fight, I feel assured that I shall come to an untimely end. I have seen so much of
this system; I have seen so much of the brutality of the purse-proud liberalmasters,
so much of the suffering of their slaves, both old and young, that I would cheerfully venture my life to-morrow to put' an end to the damnable system, a system
which if not stopped, will snap every tie by which society should be bound.
This system cannot be checked, cannot be controlled, by act of Parliament; its
abettors are too wealthy, and, therefore, too powerful for the government. Their
means of assault are centralized, and easily congregated for moral exhibitions of

ix
the march of intellect: the system then can only be kept within proper bounds
by establishing a free labour market, where the real value of man's labour can
be ascertained,. and below which those employed in the artificial market would not
work; such a system would prevent the markets being glutted with the produce
of cheap labour, and would, at once, in some definable way, regulate the supply to
the demand. The great barrier in !the way of so desirable an object, is the representative quality vested in land, and the consequent management of it, with
reference to politics and no reference to production. Farms are let in large and
unprofitable allotments, with the view of creating such a dependency between
landlord and tenant as will insure the vote of the latter. Once destroy this,
and then the landlords will find it to be their interest to bring the land into the
retail market, and then, but not till then, can artificial labour be made serviceable
to the state or to those empolyed at it; and then, but not till then, will England be
independent of all the world for food 'and raiment, and "all the good things of this life,
I shall hereafter enter more fully upon this subject; and shall, for the present, take
my leave of the League by repeating my challenge to that body to meet their
whole corps, or their picked spouters, in every large town in England, Scotland,
and Wales (with free admission), I paying one-half of the expense and they the
other half. And as they have taken Drury Lane for the off nights during Lent,
I challenge them with one week's notice and free discussion, and free admission,
I paying one-half of the expense and the League the other half.
In" this introduction I have felt it my duty thus generally to glance at those
causes which led to the outbreaks in August last, more particularly as I was Drevented by the frequent interruptions of the Attorney-General from saddling them
which, had I been permitted, and which I think I
upon the back of the League ;.
had a right to do, the country would have learned who the real offenders were;
whereas, as far as the parties on trial were concerned, the whole thing ended in a
bottle of smoke; the stigma resting upon the Government, firstly, for having undertaken the prosecution at all; and, secondly, having undertaken it, wanting courage
to charge the real offenders.
I shall now proceed to consider the effect likely to be produced upon the public
mind by the result of the trial at Lancaster. I have shewn you how the substitution of the term Reformer for that of Whig materially conduced to the injury of
that party-so with our party. Major Cartwright, Hunt, Cobbett, Wooller, Gale
Jones, and others, had successfully dragged Radicalism through that ordeal through
which a democratic party must ever pass. Whatever suffering was to be endured
in its passage through those several stages, they, as the leaders, were subjected to;
tyranny at length became exhausted, principle triumphed, and Radicalism, stripped
of the hobgoblinism with which ignorance shrouded it, triumphed. The movement party was known, had become strong and united under the political term
Radical, when, lo !-and to shew you there is much in a name, our political
opponents rebaptized us, giving to us the name of Chartists. Now, although there
was no earthly difference between the principles of a Radical and of a Chartist, yet
did the press of both parties, and the very arch-devil whose name stands first in the
list of those members of Parliament who adopted the principles of the people's
charter, contrive to alarm the prejudices of the weak, the timid, and the unsuspecting, until at length they accomplished their desired object-a split between
parties seeking one and the same end. Then was the new titled mob once more compelled to drag the principles of radicalism through the fiery ordeal of social and government persecution under its new and horrorizing name of Chartism; and had Sturge
succeeded in rebaptizing us, all the vahlue of transportation, of imprisonment and
persecution endured by the Chartist body for six years, would have been lost, and
complete suffrage, the founders, finding a timely excuse when its real advocates
were fbund to be sincere, should furnish its victims to social vengeance- and government persecution. Herein then lies the value of the recent triumph.-Democratic

principles are, in the outset, met with taunt, with scorn, and with insult---such is
the social persecution; then they become persecuted by the law, and backed by the
powere of society, the straining of the law is approved as a justifiable means of
arresting their progress. At length, in the zeal of those who are appointed to,
administer the law, the thAing: is- over-stretched, society becomes alarmed for its
own liberties, the question becomes discussed, through discussion truth becomes
elicited, and truth being the beacon by which Chartism is guided in its course,
Chartism. triumphs and lives, while its persecutors are humbled and humiliated,
and: their names but remembered with loathing and execration. Calm discussion
will now succeed persecution, and as discussion is the very main-spring of legislation, from it will ultimately result a confession of the righteousness of our principles,
and then will follow the calmi consideration as to the safest means of giving them
effect.
Those who recollect the trial of Chartists in 1839 and '40, and especially those
whose ruined constitutions are living evidence of the injustice of the sentences passed
in those days, must marvel at the successful stand made by public opinion. In
less than three years from this date it will scarcely be believed that a judge, sworn
to administer justice, consigned honest. English working-men to hard labour and
silence for two, three, and four years, when, insome instances, not a single violation
of the law was committed. I was present at the trial of Hoey, Ashton, and
Crabtree, at York, when not a single act of conspiracy, riot, sedition or tumult was
proved against them, when no evidence arose out of a public meeting which they
were charged with having attended in the open air in mid-day, when the prosecuting attorney gave them a good character, and yet did Mr. Justice Erskine consign
them to a felon's prison, hard labour and silence for two long years. The receiat
trials, not only at Liancaster, but at Derby and elsewhere, give hliope that the savage
ferocity of party spirit will not longer be tolerated, and that the laws henceforth
must be justly administered instead of being whimsically strained for the suppression of those principles which tyranny, in its most savage form, can Pever obliterate
from the minds of working men, nor drive them from their advocacy, until theyshall,
and that ere long, become recognised and embodied in an Act entitled, the PEOPLE's
CHARTER.

NORTH LANCASIRE SPRING ASSIZES.

OF

FEARG US

'CONNORESQUIRE,

AND 58 OTHER CHARTISTS,

ON A CHARGIE

F.-Y
SEDITIOUS

CONSPIRACY

Nisi Prius-Coutrt Lanc aster, Wednesday, March 1st, 1843.
,

This trial, which was looked forward to with the most intense and thrillinginterest
Inof evershade fp
to
tecountry,not only as an -event which
would fully develope. the -origin and progress of th ateoutbreak inthe manufacturing
districts-and mark outIwithz. legal precision who were its reallpromoters, 11tit also as
affording. an opportunity ofauthoritiatively- defining what are the legitimate limitsof
persuasiaon.; or, in other words, whether any number of men may combine
"to endeavour to: ,persuade otersolitical
opinions, commenced this
morning.. Long,,,bbefore-: the, usualthour of openingthe proceediigs, thecourt was
densely lthrongled-with spectators,among whom the idefen dants were promiscuously
interspersed,. On. either side of the bench. an array of beauty and. fashion presented itself such as we have seldom seen gracing a court of ju'dicature. Many if.
the fair -sex. continued their. attendance, without intermission, from day to day, 0and
from the beginning of this important trial to its close, evincing. the most lively interestin .the proceedings.
Mi~. Baron iRolfe took his seat at nime. o'clock- precisely,. and- the prothonotary,.
havin-g., called over -the list of special jurors, some were excused: on valid'grounds ..from.
serving, .and'.others were finled' £26 eachfor non-attendance. As ithere-,were ol
nine. persons, remaining," a tales!was, prayed".for, an d, three: others were added from
the common i ury.' The following- are! their names
JAME9S AN-DRRTI of Duxbuiry, s. FrmN,
James Itothwell Barnesj, of-Great. Lever, Esq.
Edward "'Brooke;, of. Rusholme, ,morehanti,,.
Isaiah Ashley, of -Kirkdalej, merchant.
Thomas Edgelky. ofRq'sholM.e;.merchant.
mrchat.
Foriyth WMilliam Smith-, of. Toxtth Pit;ark
Chiarles Armstrong, f Eetnmrhmit
iv, Chob:to-4pon*Med1oek.
James-rBlyth, Pixuh
Thomas Ha gue, of Wavertree, metchant,
Richard:H arrison,,of Jturnley.
William Scott.

We believe the following to be a tolerably correct account ofthe.names of the
fifty-nine defendants, which were not officially read from the indictment, or in any
other way announced. We class them alphabetically, surnames first, for convenience of reference:
Lees, Robert
Lewis, John
M'Douall, Peter:Murray
M'Cartney, Bernard
Massey,,John
Mahon, Thomas
Mooney, James
Morris, David
NormauJohn
O'Connor, Feargus
Otley, Richard
Parkes, Samuel
P
Filling, Richard
Pitt,.Thomas
Ross, David
Railton, Thomas
Ramsden, Robert
Scholefield, James
Scholefield, William
Smith, Thomas Browne
Skevington, James
Stephenson, William
Storah, Thomas
Taylor, Frederick Augustus
Taylor, James
Thornton, John
Woolfenden, Albert
Wilde, John
Woodruffe, William

Aikin, William
Arthur James, alias M'Arthur
Allinson, John
Arran, John
Bairstow, John
Brooke, Robert
Beesley, 'William
Brophy, Patrick .Murphy
Booth, William
Campbell, John
Cartledge, James
Cooper, Thomas
Clarke, Joseph
Chippendale, James
Challenger, Alexander
Candelet, George
Crossley, John
Doyle, Christoplier
Durham, John
Fletcher, John
Fraser, Thorm's
Fenton, James
Grasby, James
Harney, George Julian

Hloyle, John
Johnson, George
Leach, James
Leach, John
Lomax. John
The counsel for th-e crown wer-e her Majesty's Attorney- General. (Sir Frederick
Pollock), the 11on. Mr. J. Stuart Wortley,. Q. C.; Sir Gregory Lewin, Q C.;
Mr. Ilildyard, and Mr. Pollock. For th.e. cefendants., Mr. Dundas, Q.C., said,
he appetared (Mr. Atherton with him) for Robert Brooke. Mr. Baines, Q.C., sai d,
he appeared (Mr. Cobhett with him) for James Scholefield and William Scholefield,
Mr. Atherton appeared, alone for James Fenton and William Stevenson. Mr. Serjeant Muro'y said, hie appeared for Thomnis Railton, John Durham, and Peter Murray M'Dounil. Mr. McOubrey appeared for Johan Thornton, James Mooney, and
William Aithin. The other defendants had no counsel., and chose to defend themselves.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that with the intention to bring about a change i the
hislearn- laws.- There were various other counts in the
ed friend might dismiss all further concern. He indictment [we believe sixteen in all] stating
thought a nolle prosequi had been issued ; but these charges in different ways. To this inhe would take a verdict of acquittal, either now dictment the defendants had severally pleaded
not guilty.
or at the end of the case.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose to
Mr. SERJEANT MURPHY said, he appeared
for George Johnson ; hut that defendant said he address the jury as follows:-May it please
should prefer conducting his own case, and he your Lordship and Gentlemen of the Jury, I
therefore defended himself.
can assure you most unfeignedly, that I never,
Mr. POLLOCK stated, that this was an in- rose to discharge a more painful duty, than it
dictment against the defendants for
now my lot to discharge this day, nor one in
and for divers unlawful assembles, for forcing which I consider the responsibility cast on those
people to leave their work, and for- issuing who hat'e advised the Crown to be greater than
-editious
and other publications, with it is on the present occasion while for a moment
respect to William Scholefield (the

son),

The

conspiracy

libels

is

I allude to circumstances, which more or less any inquiry as to what were the circumstances
must be in the knowledge of every one of you, as that led to the commission of these offences,
probably they are of almost every person in beyond what is absolutely necessary to render
Court, while I advert to them but for a moment, the facts intelligible to you. And, gentlemen,
in order to caution you against any impression having thus stated to you the duty that I conwtich you may have received with respect to ceive I have to perform, and entreat you to disany individual before you came into that box it miss from your recollection any circumstance
is scarcely possible not to entertain a strong im- tending to cast any prejudice, or which may
pression of the danger and the mischief that weigh against any of the prisoners individually, I
might arise from offences such as are imputed in shall proceed, as shortly as I can, to narrate the
the indictment, if indeed they have been com- facts which I propose to lay before you as mat,
mitted by any of the defendants. Gentlemen, I ters of evidence. Gentlemen, somewhere about
would call your attention exclusively on this oc. the 26th July, there was a meeting held atAshtoncasion to the evidence that will be laid before under.Line, the situation of which you are proyou, and I state in the outset, without the bably aware of, with reference to Manchester.
slightest difficulty, that if you are not satisfied of It is about six miles to the east of Manchester.
the guilty participation of every defendant, let At that meeting the defendant, William Woodall those who have, by their own evidence, or by ruffe, was chairman, and another of the dethe weakness of the case for the prosecution fendants, of the name of Pilling, was present, and
raised a favourable doubt in your minds, have was called upon to speak, and you will find
the benefit of that doubt, and by your verdict be that the language used on that occasion was
acquitted. Gentlemen, the offence imputed to such as could leave no doubt whatever as to
the defendants is that of endeavouring, by large what the objects and intentions of the parties
assemblies of persons, accompanied by force, assembled were. I propose to read a very few
violence, menaces, and intimidation, to produce sentences of what fell from the chairman and
such a degree of alarm and terror throughout from Pilling, mhen he addressed the meeting,
the country, as to produce a change in some of which I read, because there is no doubt that
the fundamential points of the constitution of evidence will be given to confirm the statement
this country. I shall not stop here to inquire, nor I make. Woodruffe opened the meeting by a
shall I detain you a moment to discuss, the statement in which he exhorted the people to
merits or demerits of the change, nor the beauty give over uork until they could get a fair day's
of the constitution under which we live, nor the wages for a fair day's work. He then called
The
happiness which it may or may not shed around upon Pilling to address the meeting.
those who have the blessing to live under it. language which Pilling used was very strong,
I am here not to discuss any political subject and particularly directed against the owners of
whatever. I am not here to praise the constitu- mills. A person named Aikin, one of the detion; I am here for the purpose merely of vin- fendants, said he would advise the cotton lords to
dicating the law. I doubt not his Lordship will keep within the precincts of their own palaces,
tell you that the course of proceedings which I as the dark nights were coming on, and some
have adverted to is illegal, and that it is not bold hand more daring than the rest would
by such proceedings that any change of whatever reckon with them, for the reckoning day was
sort is to be brought about in the constitution near, and a bloody reckouing4t was likely to be.
of this country; and if you are satisfied by the Gentlemen, shortly before this it appears there
evidence that the respective defendants have had been some reductions made by the masters
taken a part in a proceeding which had this for in the wages of those they employed; I think
its object, and that these means which I have there had been as many as two or three reducadverted to were the means to be resorted to by tions, and the last precedling reductions had
them, then it will be your painful duty to find been carried into effect in the month of April
them guilty. Gentlemen, as little have I to do in the last year. Some of the observations of
with the political origin of the meetings to which this meeting were made with reference to the
I must first call your attention. I propose to expected reduction of wages. Gentlemen, the
enter into no secret history of the motives of meeting of the 26th July was adjourned to
any individual anterior to the time when first the Staleybridge, it purported to be on the following
law was violated. I propose not to enter into Iday, but certainly no meeting took place then, or

else it was so little attended that it excited no return to work till the Charter became the
public attention whatever. But on the 1st of law df the land. On that occasion, Muirhouse
August, Muirhouse, the bellman df Hyde, gave used anguage,6f whih,JIbelieve, this is a cor..
notice of another meeting, and at that meeting rect statement :-" 'The people had been told of
one of the defendants, George Canidlet, acted! Sthe evils welabour uider, aid am requested-"
as. hairman. At that meeting notice was given
Mr. DUNIAS :-4My Lord,'I do not tink
of a further meeting to take place on Sunday, that Muirhouse's name is in the indictment.
the 7th of August, at Mottram 'Moor, or
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-It is. GenWedensough Green, about foir miles from Ash- tlemen, this language was used by the Chairman
ton, where the Chartists had been in the habit of a meeting at which some 6f the defendants
of holding their camp meetings. You willfind were present. I am not aware that Muirhouse
that on Sunday the 7th of August, two meet- is a defenridant. Istated that he used this lanings were held, one in the4oren6on and the other guage, and I am perfectly correct in stating to
in the afternoon, to which for a moment I will call you that what the Chairman was permitted unyour attention. In the meantime, the manufac- interruptedly to state is at least evidence of the
turers, who had given notice of an intended re- intention of those who were present; and at
duction of wages,T believe all except one had that meeting I believe several of the defendant.
withdrawn their notice of reduction; but on were actually present.
Friday, the 5th 6f August, one house having
" The people had been told of the evils we
continued its notice,-a sort of meeting of the labour under; arnd I am requested to tell you'
masters and men at that factory occurred, at that to-morrow a meeting will take place at
which something was said that gave offence to Stalybridge, at five o'clock in the morning, when
the men. I can hardly suppose that it was in- we will proceed from factory to factory; and all
the hands that will not willingly come out, we
tended to give that offence. It, however, did
much offence, and the men immediately
create
abandoned their work, and that, I believe, was
the first occasion of what is called the turn-out the land. I hope to meet you all to-morrow at
(on Friday 5th of August). On Saturday, Stalybridge, when we will join hand in hand in
August 6, there was a procession of not less this great national turn-out."
than 15,000 or 16,000 persons, who went
Gentlemen, there was a meeting on the folthrough Newton, headed by John Durhamlowing morning, at Haigh, near Stalybridge;
Mr. GREGORY :-1500 or 1600.
there were from 2,000 to 3,000 persons present;
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Another de- and there was a placard at that meeting :-" The
fendant and John Crossley.
On Sunday, men of Stalybridge will follow wherever danger
August 7th, there took place the two meetings points the way." Another placard was-" They
already,adverted to, one in the forenoon and that perish by the sword are better then they
Muirhouse, the that perish by hunger." Gentlemen, that meetanother in the afternoon.
chairman, addressed the meeting, and then, ing proceeded first to Messrs. Harrison's; they
Gentlemen, perhaps for the first time, the object there turned all the hands out, and stopped the
of the meeting was distinctly avowed. Muirhouse mills; they then proceeded to 'Messrs. Lee's,
told the meeting that it was neitherawage ques- where they did not find the same willingness to
tion nor a religious question. It was a national. receive their proposal to stop labour. They
question, and thtir object was to make what, burst open the doors, and by force they did that.
was commonly called the People's Charter the which at Harrison's they were able to do merely
law of the land. On that occasion Candelet, by their presence and appearance. Gentlemen,
one of the defendants, spoke, and Wilde who is" it was arranged that they should- meet the folnow, I believe, suffering under sentence at lowing morning, and something was said about
.Chester, was another who addressed that meeting. going to Manchester; and at a very early hour
At 2 o'clock in the afternoon there Was,a larger on Tuesday the 9th of August, there were meetmeeting at which the defendants John Leach, ings at Hyde, at Stalybridge,-(the defendant
Thomas Storah, Thomas Mahon, and William Pilling was there,)-and at Ashton ; and from
Stephenson spoke. At that meeting it was the places where they all assembled, they deterstatedfthat on the following day there should mined to marchupon Manchester. Aid accordlhea general turn-out, and, that no one shouldl ingly, some thousands of persons, you will find,

5
with a certain descriptionof arms, withbludgeons mend the people of all
trades and callings forthand banners,-having some appearance of mili- with to cease work, until the above document
tary rank, and array, and order,-marched upon, becomes the law of the land.' "
I may here incidently remark, that, if a numthe town of Manchester; and, finding the mili-_
tary very near the entrance of the town, they ber of persons had formed the design of going
halted, and~there was a sort of parley between about the country, from place to place, for the
them, the magistrate and the military. To the purpose of creating a cessation of labour, and
remonstrances of the magistrate they answered, compelling the public authorities of the country
that their:object was peace, law, and order; and to adopt a particular change in the constitution,
.theypromised faithfully to keep the peace, and to all those, who, in any way, afforded encouragecommit no disorder of any kind. The magistrate ment of any sort to the persons who were so
withdrew the military, and putting himself--not acting, became, what in law is called, accessories,
exactly at their head as a leader, but for the pur- before or after the fact, would make very little
pose of pointingout to them I suppose,where they difference; for, in a case of misdemeanour, which
might go with propriety, and to watch them, this is, all accessories are principals; all who
that they did no mischief, - the magistrate aid, encourage, assist, or foment this description
placed himself along with them, and they marched of offence,: are themselves guilty of that which
into the town together; the military having they encourage in others; and it will be for you
been withdrawn to prevent any hostile conflict. to say, whether this resolution, and other resoThey had scarcely got into the town, when those lutions of a similar kind, being brought home
who were rather in the rear separated themselves to certain parties before you as defendants,from the rest; and forming into various bands whether you can entertain any doubt as to the
went from street to street, and from house to object with which resolutions of this character

house, and took possession of the town. For were put forth. It will be for you to say,
three days the shops were shut up; all labour whether those who adopted this method of enwas stopped; portions of the mob went from couraging, promoting, assisting, and giving
place to place; not merely at the mills, but at effect to the designs of others, must not be
every place where the labour of man was used, considered by you, as in point of fact, adopting
they went and enjoined the cessation of labour. this course with a view to assist and to promote
In some instances, they demanded bread; in the designs of others. If so, I believe his lordothers, they accepted money; but, for three ship will tell you, that they altogether and
days, Manchester was in a state of the most entirely participate in the full guilt which they
lawless riot and confusion. The following week thus encourage. By this time, the state of Manwas remarkable at Manchester, for the introduc- chester had attracted te attention of the aution of some other proceedings, still more threat- thorities there, and also the authorities in
ening in their aspect than erhaps the assem- London; and on the 14th there was a proclathantheiraspect
lages of these- persons already described. It mation issued by the magistrates of their own
appears, that at that time there had been sitting authority; and onthe 15th there was aproclaat Manchester a collection of delegates or per- mation issued in the name of the queen by the
sons in the Trades' union; and I beg to call executive government. And after those proclayour attention to a resolution of the trades, mations, calling upon every one to observe the
which was put forth on Friday the 12th August peace, to abstain from giving encouragement to
the violence of others, it became still more and
Gentlemen, the resolution was this :"That we, the delegates representing the more the dutyof all persons who were determined
various trades of Manchester and its vicinities, to obey the law, or who were not determined to
with delegates from various parts of Lancashire disobey it, to abstain from any proceeding that
and Yorkshire, do most emphatically declare, could give encouragement, directly or indirectly,
that it is our solemn and conscientious conviction to those who were still goig about the country,
that all the evils that afflict society, and which from place to place, by intimidation, to turn out
have prostrated the energies of the great body those who were anxious to continue at work for
ofthe producing classes,
solely from class
legislation; .and that the only remedy for ~he theirmasters On the Myiondy there was ameetpresent alarming distress and wide-.spread desti- ing of trades at,I think, the Sherwood Inn, Tibn
t.tian isthe immediatean nm tilated adoiti istreet; and they adjourned to the Carpenters'
o

warise

the people's charter.-' That this meeting recom.l I-all. There the defendant Dixon--

Mr. PART:-Dixon was not at that meeting. professions, whenever a convenient opportunity
ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I thought he may occur. Gentlemen, on Tuesday the 16th
was.-There a placard was produced, which, I August, there was another meeting, no t now of
think, it is not worth while to read now; but I the trades, but there was a meeting of delehasten on to other matters. But you will find, gates, forming a sort of convention to represent
that at that meeting various motions and reso- the people of England, from different parts of
lutions were carried; and, at length, it was the country; and I believe that not less than
determined to issue a placard, to Which I think from 40 to 60 or 70 delegates arrived at Manit right to call your attention.
chester. At one of the meetings, undoubtedly,
about 40 actually attended. Gentlemen, at that
" LIBERTY.
address was considered and approved
"Liberty to the trades of Manchester and the meeting ani
surrounding districts. - Fellow-workmen, we of, as an address to be printed and published to
hasten to lay before you the paramount import- the people of England.
It was an address
ance of this day's proceedings. The delegates from five persons, styling themselves " the
from the surrounding districts have been more Executive Committee of the National Associa.
numerous at this day's meeting then they were tion for carrying the Charter," and I now beg
at yesterday's, and the spirit and determination
to call your attention to the contents of that
manifested for the people's rights have increased
every hour. In consequence of the unjust and paper. The proof-sheet of this paper, corrected
unconstitutional interference of the magistrates in the hand-writing of one of the defendantsour proceedings were abruptly brought to a close I think Peter Murray M'Douall-will be proby their dispersing the meeting; but not until, duced in evidence before you; and with respect
in their very teeth, we passed the following reso- to his participation in it, it would be idle to
lution :-' Resolved-That the delegates in public suggest any doubt, because the proof-sheet was
meeting assembled, do recommend to the various actually corrected by himself, in his own handconstituences which we represent, to adopt all writing. I beg to call your attention to the
legal means to carry into effect the people's title of this placard. It is an "Address of the
charter; and further, we recommend that deleExecutive Committee of the National Chartist
gates be sent through the whole of the country to
endeavour to obtain the co-operation of the mid- Association to the people."
" Brother Chartists,- The great political
dle and working classes in carrying out the resolution of ceasing labour until the charter became truths which have been agitated during the last
the law of the land.'-English:nen, legally deter- half-century have at length aroused the degraded
mine to mantain the peace and well-being of and insulted white slaves of England to a sense
society; and show, by your strict adherence to of their duty to themselves, their children, and
our resolution, that we are your true representa- their country. Tens of thousands have flung
tives. Do your duty. We will do ours. We down their implements of labour. Your taskmeet again to-morrow; and the result of our masters tremble at your energy, and expecting
masses eagerly watch this the great crisis of our
deliberations will be fully laid before you."
cause.
be the common
Now, gentlemen, I have read to you every prey of Labour must no longer Intelligence has
masters and rulers.
word of this. There occur in it expressions
beamed upon the mind of the bondsman; and
with respect to "legal means," and "keeping he has been convinced, that all wealth, comfort,
the peace." Gentlemen, I am afraid that those and produce, every thing valuable, useful, and
who directed the framing that paragraph would elegant, have sprung from the palms of his hands;
probably differ from the views which his lord- he feels that his cottage is empty, his back thinly
ship will probably lay down to you, as to what clad, his children breadless, himself hopeless,
are the legal means by which such objects may his mind harrassed, and his body punished, that
be carried into effect; but it will be for you to undue riches, luxury, and gorgeous plenty, might
judge whether, because the language of "peace, be heaped in the palaces of the task-masters, and
law, and order" is upon the lips of those who flooddd into the granaries of the oppressor. Nature, God, and reason, have condemned this
use such expressions, accompanied by very dif.
inequality ; and in the thunder of a people's voice
ferent conduct-it will be for you to judge how it must perish for ever. He knows that labour,
far these expressions, which are used in a placard the real property of society, the sole origin of
put forth to the public, really convey the inten- accumulated property, the first cause of all nation of those who use them; or whether they tional wealth, 2nd the only supporter, defender,
are used with the intention to depart from those and contributor to the greatness of our country,

is not possessed of the same legal protection
which is given to those lifeless effects, the houses,
ships, and machinery which labour have alone
created."
I do not know whether I need read the whole
of it.
" Therefore it is that we have solemnly sworn,
and one and all declared, that the'golden opportunity now within our grasp shall not pass away
fruitless; that the chance of centuries, afforded
to us by a wise and all-seeing God, shall not be
lost; but that we do now universally resolve
never to resume labour, until labour's grievandes
are destroyed, and protection secured .to ourselves, our suffering wives, and helpless children,
by the enart,ment of the people's charter. Englishmen the blood of your brethren reddens the
streets of Preston and Blackburn."
Gentlemen, I regret deeply to say, that at

ignorant, that though undoubtedly a large portion of that rest from labour was accepted cheerfully by many, a very considerable proportion of
it-I believe I should not be wrong if I said the
greater part of it-was imposed upon a reluctan
population by the activity, force, and threats of
those who went from place to place to produce
a compulsive abandonment of labour.

Preston and Blackburn there had been a conflict
with the military, which unfortunately did terminate in bloodshed. Now you perceive the
language there is used with reference to that
event.
" Englishmen! the blood of your brethren
reddens the streets of Preston and Blackburn,
and the murderers thirst for morel Be firm, be
courageous, be men. Peace, law, and order,
have prevailed on our side-let them be revered
until your brethren in Scotland, Wales, and
Ireland are informed of your resolution; and
when a universal holiday prevails, which will be
the case in eight days, then of what use will
bayonets be against public opinion ? What tyrant
can then live above the terrible tide of thought
and energy, which is now flowing fast, under the
guidance of man'sintellect, which is now destined
by a Creator to elevate his people above the reach
of want, the rancour of despotism, and the penalties of bondage ? The trades, a noble, patriotic
band, have taken the lead in declaring for the
charter, and drawing their gold from the keeping
of tyrants. Follow their example. Lend no
whi o rueswherewit to so e
i'
"Intelligence has reached us of the widespreading of the strike; and now, within fifty
miles of Manchester, every engine is at rest, and
all is still, save the miller's useful wheels and
friendly sickle in the fields."
Gentlemen, that was perfectly true. Within
50 miles of Manchester, all was still; but in
what'way that stillness was produced, whether
by the spontaneous wish of all the persons who
were compelled to observe that stillness, you
shall judge to-day by the -vidence; and then
you must further judge whether those who
penned this document could by possibility be

thren, we or womanlyyour firmness, cowarice,
treachery, rely upon fear, would cast our cause
back for half a century. Let no man, woman,
or child, break down the solemn pledge; and, if
they do, may the curse of the poor and starving
pursue them-they deserve slavery who would
madly court it. Our machinery is all arranged,
and your cause will, in three days, be impelled
onward by all the intellect we can summon to its
aid: therefore, whilst you are peaceful, be firm;
whilst you are orderly, make all be so likewise;
and whilst you look to the law, remember that
you had no voice in making it, and are therefore
the slaves to the will, the law, and the price of
your masters. All officers of the association are
called upon to aid and assist in the peaceful extension of the movement, and to forward all
moneys for the use of the delegates who may be
expressed over the country: Strengthen our
hands at this crisis. Support your leaders.
Rally round our sacred cause, and leave the
decision-"
Now where, gentlemen, do you think the decision is.left after these appeals to " peace, law,
and order," and to "peaceful struggle" ?-

" Countrymen and brothers, centuries may roll
on, as they have fleeted past, before such universal action may again be displayed: we have made
the cast for liberty; and wemust stand, like men,
the hazard of the die. Let none despond. Let
all be cool and watchful, and, like the bridesmaids in the parable, keep your lamps burning :
and let your contiued resolution be like a beacor
to guide those who are now hastening, far and
wide, to follow your memorable example. Bre.

Leave the decision to the God of justice and
of battle." Gentlemen, this placard was extensively dispersed over Manchester, and it became a
sort of rallying point to the various meetings
that took place afterwards; and the question
that you have to decide is, whether all those
who are concerned in the framing and putting
forth of that placard-whether in the entire
scope and object of that publication you do not
find a direct encouragement to those persons
who were going about the country from factory
to factory, and from mill to mill,-I might say
almost from house to house,-to suspend labour

of every kind, and to do it by force and menace than one. But, as reinarks may be.made on
inorder to carry out that change in the consti- testimony of that description, and as you have
tution which would be effected by making the a right to have such testimony confirmed by
people's charter the law of the land. Gentle. every document which I can have recourse to
men, you will have evidence given of what: for the purpose, I shall prove against several
occurred at the meeting of delegates; and as persons, out of their own lips, that they were
there, and for what purpose they were there.
against one of the defendants, I mean Mr. F.,
On the 20th of August the following paraO'Connor, you will have the clearest evidence
of his participation in it, by a direct allusion to graph appeared in the. Northern Star in referit in his own newspaper, the Northern Star, to ence to the Meeting of delegates in conference
which his name is af~xed as a proprietor, and in Manchester:"This body was driven by the ' troublous
for the contents of which he is responsible.
Gentlemen, I propose first to read to you, from the thies ' from the consideiation of the particular
Northern Star, a few expressions which clearly matters and things for which it was summoned.
connect Mr. Feargus O'Connor with the publi- The all-absorbing interest of the ' strike ' movecation of that document. The expressions I ment was forced on the attention of its members
as a first object of consideration. Itbeing known
allude to are contained in the Northern Star of
that thie sitting of-this body was to commence on
the 20th of August. Gentlemen, Ithink it per- Monday, itwas generally understood and believed
fectly right here to say, that, I believe that be- that they would take up the subject.;' and the defore this time, many paragraphs have been pub- cision to which they might come as to the course
lished in the Northern Star, dissuading the of action to be commended was looked for by
people from taking the course that they seemed hundreds of thousands with an intenseness of
to be bent upon; and whatever benefit in any anxiety perfectly indescribable.
SThe conference commenced its session at
way Mr. Feargus O'Connor can derive from a
candid admission on my part, I admit at once, two P.M., and continued, by adjournments, till
that, prior to this time, apparently the Northern about seven on Wednesday evening. [Andthen
Btar was directed against the strike. The he gives the statement.] Their deliberations
were, as might be expected, most anxious; the
benefit of that admission I should certainly not
discussions most animated and earnest, andwhile
seek to withhold from Mr. Feargus OConnor some difference prevailed on the course to be
on the present occasion. But you cannot doubt recommended to the people, one soul and pur.from the paper which I hold in my hand, from pose seemed to animate the entire assembly as to
somereason-whetherbecausetheimpulse seemed the necessity of enforcing, by every means in
to be so strong-,whether the current seemed to be their individual and collective power, the observso irresistible that it was no longer of any use ance of peace, law, and order by and among the
to stem it--whether he was carried along by people. Each member, in the first instance,
that current, or whether, seeing that there was stated to the conference, so far as he had the
such a prospect of chartism becoming the law means of knowing it, the sthte of his o n distriet, and the opinion of his constituents in
of the land that Mr. Feargus O'Connor thought reference to ' the strike.'
the time was come when a use might be made
" A general, anxious, and protracted discussion
of the turn-out, I know not: I deal with the then'ensued upon the question of adopting the
facts merely as they are before me. But I find following resolution of the delegates:in the paper of the 20th of August, a statement
" That whilst the Chartist body diel not oriof what occurred at the meeting of delegates in ginate the present cessation from labour, the
the conference in Manchester, and I use this conference of delegates from various parts of
statement as against Mr. O'Connor. The paper England express their deep sympathy with their
proves the facts stated in it-that there was a constituents, the working men now on strike;
meeting of delegates: I shall confirm this by and thatwe strongly approve the extension and
of their present Struggle until the
notes found in the handwriting of one of the continuance
becomesalegisla:tive enactment,
members of the conference, who took notes of People's Chaeer
and decide forthwith to issue an address to that
what passed. Gentlemen, I shall, last qf all,
effect; and pledge ourselres, on our returu to our
confirm it by the testimony of a person present, respective localities, to .give a proper direction, to
and who now (with whatever spirit it is for you the people's efforts.' Every speaker was reto judge) is willing to give evidence of what stricted to five minutes, and no man allowed to
took place at that assembly, and I believe more speak twice on the same question. An amend-

ment was proposed, differing from the resolution ling them to obey 'peace, law, and order. Now,
in phraseology, but having the same purport. gentlemen, this is the address of the national
Anotheramendmentwasproposedto the effect that conference to the chartist public. I shall prove,
-- ' The information laid before this conference by other witnesses, the facts that are stated in
by the several delegates of whom it is composed this paper; because you must be on your guard
\does not warrant this conference in now recom- on this point, that this paper is evidence against
mending to the people any national strike or
holiday, or in any way mixing up the ChartistMr. O'Connor alone; but, as against him, it is
name and movement with the present strike for as good evidence as could possibly be given;
wages, subsisting in some districts, and origi- because it is deliberately published by him, as a
nated, as this conference believes, by the Anti- part of a paper of which, I believe, he is the
Corn Law League; not seeing any means whereby sole proprietor. You will find, that this is the
the said strike can nowbe made a successful effort address; I shall read to you only a few sentences
for the carrying of the People's Charter; while of it; the rest you will have read to you by
at the same time this conference deeply sympa- and bye :thise with their oppressed brethren on strike,
"You have not struck, you have been stricken;
and admire the spirit of energy and patriotism but let the stroke recoil upon the tyrants who
with which the trades of Manchester and at other have so cruelly arrayed themselves against the
places have declared for the People's Charter."
interests of labour.
The narrative goes on after suggesting this
" Brothers, these are not times to hesitate!
amendment:The corn has a golden hue while your visages are
" After almost every member had spoken upon pale, but hope for change and better times. We
the question, it was put, and the original reso- are fortunate in having an accredited executive,
bearing the confidence of all, at our head."
lution carried by alarge majority."
Gentlemen,-that is the executive body of five
Now observe what that original resolution
was-That the Meetsng pledge themselves to persons connected with the Chartists, whose
assist the people in their present struggle, and
put the Charter on the -issue of the strike then
o
s"
goimg on.
"It is but fair to state that a considerable
majority of delegates were from the districts
actually out and taking part in the struggle.
After the adoption of the above resolution, the
following address was agreed to nem. con. The
mover and supporters of the amendment deeming
it both unnecessary and unwise to maintain an
opppsition, which, from being persisted in when
seen to be powerless, might justly have been
considered factious. Now, here again, gentlemen, you will have to consider whether it was
men, you wall
possible-especially for those who came from
the district where the ' strike' was going on,-you will have to consider, whether it was possible for those who penned this motion and this
address, and held out this language to the whole
country for fifty miles round Manchester, whether they could be possibly ignorant of the
means by which the strike was carrying onwhether they could, by any possibility, not know
that the mob went, in some instances, armed;
in all instances having bludgeons, and weapons
calculated to produce menaces and fear. They
went from factory to factory, and from mill to
mill, compelling the people to turn out; and I
suppose that was what they considered compel-

address I now read to you, ending with an ap
al to the" God of justice and of battle."
They, too, have called upon you. You will
read their address: it breathes a bold and manly
pirit. We could not, in times like the present,
withhold from them, your servants, our cordial
support, as in union aloneis security to be found,
and from unanimity alone can success be ex
pected.
" Brothers, the trades have issued a noble address. It breathes a spirit worthy of old laws
and old English liberties. This, brothers, is the
time for courage, prudence, caution. watchfulness and resolution.
"I

conclusi,

brothrwe

ould, above

things, council you against the destruction
of life or property.
"Remainfirmto yourprinciples, which are to
be found int e document entitled the People's
Charter.'
On a subsequent day, on the 3rd September,
Mr. F. O'Connor published another number of
the Northern Star, in a leading column of which
he gives an account of the meeting of delegates.
It is in the form of a letter, but I believe that
is the usual manner in which Mr. O'Connor puts
a leading article into his paper. This is a letter
from Mr. Feargus O'Connor, addressed to the
imperial Chartists. He says, amoiigst other
things,6
"The delegates arrived at eight. Of course I

10
don't know any of them, as it appears that Sir for this meeting; he was present; and you will
C. Shaw has a desire to learn their names. I was hear from the witnesses the language used at
one. We sat from eight to twelve in calm dis- that meeting, by the several defendants who adcussion, but no course was decided upon. When dressedthe meeting. You will find language used,
Mr. Hargraves arrived it was unanimously re- the meaning and object of which it will be for
solved, very much against my will, that neither I
you tojudge of, andto determine what character
nor any other delegate should absent himself for
ought fairly to belong to it.
Several of the
Hall
the purpose of attending the Carpenters'
meeting, and 'amessage was sent to Rev. Mr. speakers alluded distinctly to the use of direct
Scholefield, to request him to make that com- physical force. I know that the object of many
munication to the meeting at Carpenters' Hall, of the chartists was to carry out their views,
which he did. On Wednesday we met again, without having recourse to physical force ; but
forty, and very excellent men. I believe there as to some of the defendants you will find that
were exactly forty, Mr. O'Connor and Griffin one man in particular stated, that he came from
made forty-two. We sat all day. There were a district where force had been resorted to.
two resolutions, and one address passed, and that "I have been," said he, "at Birmingham, Bilwas all the business done. I seconded the ad- ston, and the Potteries; and I have witnessed
dress, which was carried by a great majority. I the feeling of resolution among the
people. I
propbsed one of the resolutions, which.was carred unanimously. I drew up the address, the will support the resolution without making a
only address that was passed by the delegates, long speech on it, because I believe the people
and, curious to say, the Northern Star was the in Staffordshire and many other parts are deteronly paper in England that published any one of mined to fight, and are prepared for the worst.
the acts of the conference, and it published every The Shakespearians of Leicester will not be
one of them. I never saw so good a feeling per- behind in the cause. Nothing will gain our obvade any meeting of the people's leaders, never ject but showing that we are prepared to fight."
in my life. All was union and harmony. At the Gentlemen, language of this kind used in the
close of the proceedings, and after the chairman presence of other persons who make no objec.
had vacated the chair, some one asked-Tom tion to it-who hear a speaker of this kind, who
Styles, of Snook's-town, I think-whether or no take his vote, on an address-who reckon him
the placard that professed to come from the executive [The one that appeals to the "God of as one of themselves, and then put forth some
battle."] should appear in the Star? I said, address with phrases of "law,peace, and order ;"
' Yes, as an advertisement, and I will pay for why, gentlemen, I might make here an appeal
it?" At ten o'clock I walked down to Mr. Hey- to your good sense, if you can find any meaning
wood's. He was out. I remained till he re. in these phrases that justly should bring imputurned, and the first word he said was, '
Well, nity and acquittal to any of the parties present.
sir, the poor devil that printed the placard pur- But it is my duty-and I can assure you, genporting to emanate from the executive has been tlemen, a most painful duty it is-to bring
seized, and his press and type are all taken,' and under your cognizance all those circumstances,
I believe, gentlemen, in consequence of that cir- and to ask you what is the construction you put
comstance, the address did not appear in the upon them as
men of sense and experience. As
trthern Star."
to the language used and the conduct adopted,
Now, gentlemen, I have not mentioned every I ask you whether those persons who put forth
one of the defendants by name; but I shall, for this address, and passed these resolutions, and
a very short time, call your attention to one of published them,--whether they can possibly be
the defendants, before I enter on the evidenceconsidered in any other light than as associates
Mr. Scholefield: I mean the elder; for, with with the more unfortunate and less enlightrespect to the younger, having reason to believe, ened parties who were going from town to
foin respectable representations, that a mistake town, and from mill to mill, encouraged by
Mhad
tewade with regard to his appearance- those addresses, I might almost say provoked
that he was believed to be present when he was by them into the excesses which otherwise
absent, it was considered desirable that infor- they might have escaped?
Gentlemen, I
matioi should be given to him, that the charge, mentioned that Mr. Scholefield, the proprietor of
would not be made against him; and therefore a chapel, had given it up for the use of the
I shall not say one word about it. But Mr. meeting. He was present when they deliberated;
$cholefield himnef gave the use of his chapel be ..
thexe, perfectly cognizant of what was

11
going on; and it will be for you to consider
whether by any overwhelming fear he wis
obliged to be there-whether he was not a part
or parcel of the conference, and whether he
he did not assent to its proceedings. Let me
call your attention to some words uttered at
Carpenters' Hall, as he was going to his own
chapel. While the delegates were sitting in his
house, Mr. Scholefield made a communication to
some persons in Carpenters' Hall. I understand,
it was at a tea party in honour of some memorial
to Hunt. "I am glad," said Mr. Scholefield,
"' to see you so comfortable, under the circumstances in which your are placed. I have a duty
to perform with a friend (Mr. O'Connor). I
have left him with other friends of the people
advising plans to- carry on the movement-that
is, the people's cause. I have to state, considering the exact state of the town, that it would
be better if Mr. O'Connor did not appear at this
meeting. The cause may be retarded for a short
time; but it will again raise up its head, if our
leaders are not taken. The object of our enemies
is to seize our leaders; but the committee
thought it best to deprive them of that oppor.
tunity." Mr. Scholefield, it appears, was actively employed in going from one meeting to
another, as well as giving the use of his house
to the delegates; and it will be for you to say
in what light he appears. I own it would be to
me a matter of some gratification to find, that,
with reference to him, some mistake had been
committed as in the case of his son. I should
rejoice as much as any one in the innocence of
any one defendant before you to day. But I
have a duty to perform to you, and to the public
at large; and, painful as that duty may be in
many respects, it is impossible for me to shrink
from its perforinance. Now, gentlemen, I have
but one general statement to make beyond that
to which I have called your attention, and it is
one that I make with very mingled feelinga
indeed; it is with respect to the intelligence and
forbearance of those who mingled in this movement; but it is one that at the same time suggests an idea of the great extent and extreme
peril in which the country might have been
placed, if such things could take place as I am
now authorized to state. Gentlemen, all labour
of every kind had been stopped-not merely,
gentlemen, at the large maqiufactories where they
were spinning by steam engines; but there was
a general turn-out of all the hands employed in
all trades, except of those who assisted in the

production of the most ordinary necessaries of
life. I believe the baker and the butcher were
permitted to go on; but even the shoemaker
and the tailor were stopped in their labours,
until the object of the turn.out should be carried.
But it was manifest, that, if this rule was enforced rigidly and to the letter, very great public
mischief must ensue; and accordingly there sat
in at least two places (I say two, because I am
in a condition to prove there were two, but I
believe there is some evidence of committees
sitting in other places), committees who at first
styled themselves committees of public safety;
but whether the recollection of the connection
of that name with some of the scenes of the
French revolution suggested that they bad better
adopt another name, I am not prepared to say;
but I believe they afterwards called themselves
the committee of operatives. Their object was
to receive applications for a remission of the
strict rule of abstaining from labour, and to give
licenice to persons to carry on, to a limited extent,
their labours, for the purposes specified in the
license. Gentlemen, I stated to you, and I did
so most unequivocally, that I have ever considered
the existence of those committees as one of the
most formidable evidences of the extent to which
the "strike," as it is called, had pervaded all
classes of operatives; but I can prove to you,
that two, I think at least, of the defendants (one
of them is named Durham) sat at a table, composing a committee of some ten or twelve, and
received applications of the nature I have alluded
to. For instance, a tailor on one occasion, in
consequence of the death in the family of one
of his customers, was applied to to make some
mourning clothes; but he did not dare to do so.
until he went to the committee and obtained
permission. I believed there was some doubt
entertained that he went beyond the license, and
a deputy was sent to enquire into the matter.
On one occasion the water works of the town was
nigh being stopped under a similar pretence. It
so happened that the power which conveyed the
water was also employed in connection with
some private works; and, while the committee
gave an order to have the power employed for
the use of the water-works, they forbade it with
reference to the private interest connected with
it. In other cases, a license was granted to get
coals enough to supply the engine which kept
the coal-pits free from water. I believe, I need
not detail all the instances of this kind which
occurred; but you will find, that there is quite

evidence enough to satisfy you that a committee
sat, and that one or two of the defendants were
members of that committee; and that they were
granting licenses, permitting persos to carry
on, to a certain extent, the labour which other.
wise they would not be permitted to do. Gentlemen, this is a proof of the extraordinary
extent and intelligence with which this matter
was carried on, and the numbers that were engaged in this species of strange violation of the
law, at the same time that it appearedto have for
its object, to a certain extent, the interest of society. Gentlemen, there can be no doubt, that, if
any attempt of this sort was to be again made, it
perhaps could not be made with more respect for
property and for life than what it generally did
obtain, even where violence was used. I should,
gentlemen, bear willing testimony to the forbearance and moderation that frequently appeared, eveh in the midst of the lawless acts
that were committed. The boldest defiance of
the law was accompanied by a iespect for life
and property to which I bear willing testimony.
I feel rejoiced that I live in a country where, if
excesses of this description occur, they are tempered by the forbearance and moderation which
shines conspicuously even amidst the violation of
law which I have mentioned. Gentlemen, in
addressing you, I have been under a sense of the
extreme importance of the duty I have to discharge, and which you will by-and-bye, have to
discharge. In making this statement to you
and in bringing forward the evidence, and, you
dealing with it as gentlemen upon your oaths,
there sitting, sworn to do justice, I have, I hope,
not less from temper and feeling than from a
discreet discharge of my duty, abstained from
using one solitary expression of harshness. I
desire to give no character to these offences
beyond that which the law does, and has done;
I desire not to raise your feelings, from any
sense of danger, that you will not do justice. I
invoke you as dispassionately as it is possible
under these circumstance to do, calmly and
boldly, but firmly, to assist in the administration of the law. Gentlemen, to you will be
ultimately committed the question of the guilt
or innocence of the parties who will be respectively called on. It is possible, that as to some,
there may be that weakness of evidence, or that
absence of violent spirit, which may induce you
favourablyto consider the case of some individuals.
In that favourable consideration I shall cordially
go along with you, whether it be to exclude

from your verdict of guilty or, to find them
guilty, or to recommend them to the favourable
consideration of the Court above. Gentlemen,
with these observations, endeavouring as much
as possible to abstain from, any topic that may
disturb you in the calmest exercise of your funtions, and in the most faithful discharge of your
duty, as well to the defendants as to the public,
on whose behalf it is professed this prosecution
is brouglt before you, I leave the case for the
present in your hands. Dismiss every recollection you have of any party, attend to the evidence, do justice, and deliver your verdict accordingly. t
The JUDGE :-With respect to what has
been said by the Attorney-general in reference
to Scholefield, I wish to know, are there any
others against whom he will not proceed ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-Perhaps your lordship will
allow him to be acquitted.
The JUDGE :-I do not think it right to acquit him till the whole case is gone through.
Mr. BAINES :-My learned friend the Attor.
ney-general offered it.
The JUDGE :-I think we had better let the
whole case be gone through.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I will give
you a nolle prosequi.
George Johnson, one of the defendants, informed the Court that he understood Mr. Mur.phy had undertaken to defend him, but he
,(Johnson) would rather defend himself.
Mr. MURPHY :-My Lord, I am to defend
him.
Geo. JOHNSON :-My Lord, I have not furnished the learned gentleman with a brief, and
I will give you the reasons which have induced
me to defend myself.
The JUDGE :-Givy no reasont. Are you to
defend yourself or to be defended by. Counsel?
JOHNSON:-I will defend myself.
Mr. MURPHY :-I have a roving commission.
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR applied to have
all the witnesses on both sides ordered out of
Court.
The JUDGE complied, and an order to that
effect was immediately given.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL asked permission for two reporters, who were to be examined
from their notes, to remain in Court.
The JUDGE :-I shall not order out of Court
either witnesses to character, or wvitnesses who
are to give testimony of a formal nature, such

as proving notices. &c. The order apphes only
to witnesses who are to speak to the facts of the
case.
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR:-No, my Lord,
not witnesses to character, or to facts of importance. I do not wish you to order out of
Court such witnesses.
Mr. WORTLEY:-There are two reporters
to the public Newspapers here, my Lord, Mr.
Hanly and Mr. Grant, who are to speak to what
they have in their notes, and it is not necessary
that the order should extend to them,
Mr. F. O'CONNOR :-I cannot take upon me
to speak as to reporters who speak to material
facts.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--They are to
give evidence as to what took place on other
occasions.
The JUDGE :-They will produce a written
paper ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-They will
speak to facts from written documents.
The JUDGE :-Then I shall not order them
out of Court, that is in substance, producing a
written document.
Joseph Haigh was then called and examined
by the,Hon. Stuart Wortley.
You live at Ashtorq-Under-Lyne ? I do, sir.
Were you living there in July last ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-Are you sworn? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-What business do you follow? Iamamilk-man. Do you remember in the
course of that month any meetings taking place
in Ashton? Yes. Were you present at any
meeting which took place in July last? Yes.
Where was that meeting held? On a piece of
waste ground, near Thacker's foundry. It is a
piece of waste ground near Thacker's foundry,
and sometimes called Thacker's ground? I believe so. What time f the day was it that you
were at that meeting ? It was in the evening,
from half-past eight to a little after nine o'clock.
Can you give us any idea of what number of
persons were assembled? Well, I should fancy
there were from 3000 to 4000, or perhaps moke,
present. A large meeting, was it ? A very large
meeting, sir. Were yo there when they first
assembled, or did you go afterwards ? Afterwards.
You found them assembled? Yes, sir. Was
You found them assembled ?
es, sir. Was
there any chairman ? There was, sir. Who was

he.? Win. Woodroffe.
The JUDGE :.--Woodroffe?
Mr. WORTLEY:-He is one of the defend.
ants, my Lord. (To witpess) Had you knownhim
before? Yes. Where was he placed, or how
did youknow him to be chairman ? I know him

to bethe chairman by his introducing the speakers
to the meeting. Was he elevated on any thing
He was. What was it? I cannot say whether
it was a cart or a waggon. 'What business does
Woodrofi follow? He is a shoemaker. Yoia
say he introduced the speakers to the meeting-who was the first speaker? Mr. Aitkin.
Mr.WORTLEY :-That is another defendant,
my Lord. (To witness) Had you known him
before? I had, sir. Can you tell us any part of
what Aitkin said? Yes, Yir. What do you remember him saying ? After speaking on the Charter and different things a considerable time, he
said, he should advise the cotton lords, particularly the Messrs. Reyners, to keep within the
precincts of their own palaces, as dark nights
were coming on, and the reckoning day was at
hand. Had you seen that expression any where
u seen tha exp sion an her
hand.
that morning? I had not, sir. During the.
meeting, or during that day, did you see any
thing of that kind? Before that day, sir. Well,
before that day, what had you seen? A placard
on the wallsof Ashton. Containing those words?
It was headed that way, or contained some such.
words.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I suppose it was a placard
headed, "Behold, the reckoning day is nigh!"
The JUDGE :-What doyou mean by placard?
Witness :-A placard announcing the meeting.
Was it near the wall, or placedon the wall? It
was on the wall.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I object to evidence respect.
ing that placard because it is not pretended to be
brought home to any of the defendants.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-It is not
worth while contending about it.
The JUDGE:-If it was pasted to the wall I
do not know how you can bring it into court
without bringing the wall.
Mr.WORTLEY :-" The day of reckoning is
at hand," what after that? Witness. I do not
particularly recollect any thing further, than that
he should advise the Messrs. Reyners to keep at
home, as the reckoning day was at hand. Did
he explain the "reckoning day " in.any way ?
Mr. DUNDAS:'-" What did he say more,'"
Mr. Wortley, if you please?
Mr.WORTLEY:-And did he say any thing
more about the reckoning ? Nothing that I can
more about Did reckoning? Nothing that I can
recollect. the he speak about any other parties
in that way? I cannot say. Were you at a
i
meeting on Fridaythe 12th of August? Yes.
Where was-that meeting? In Charlestown meet.
ing-room.
The JUDGE :--In Charlestown meeting-room
-- is that adjoining Ashton ? .Witness :-Yes,
my Lord.
Mr.WORTLEY:--Can you speak to any other

14
person who took part in the meeting ? I cannot. of any other person who was at that meeting, and
But did you see any other person who took part
in the proceedings ?, Yes, but I do not know
who they were. Now, you say there was a meeting on the 12th of August in the Chftrlestown
chapel ?
The JUDGE :-I.s that a chapel or a meetingroom ? Witness :-I do not know, my Lord,
which.
Mr. WORTLEY :-At what time of the day
was that meeting held ? At nine o'clock in the
morning. How was that meeting called ? By
the bellman, sir. Who was in the chair at that
meeting? John Alexander Stuart. Were you
there to see who moved his taking the chair?
I was. Who moved that he should' take the
chair? Woodroffe asked him privately, to himself, if he would take the chair.
The JUDGE :-The same Woodroffe who
was present at the other meeting? Witness:-

Yes, my Lord.
Mr. BAINES :-Were you near him? Yes.
And did you hear him ? I did.
Mr. WORTLEY :-How many persons were
present in that meeting-house ? From 60 to 80,
as near as I could fancy. Did the number in.
crease during the meeting ? I canpot say it did
during the time I stayed. Did you hear Woodroffe taking any part in the proceedings besides
what you have already noticed ? I did. What
did you hear him say? That he had a resolution
to propose, to the effect, that it would facilitate
the advance of the wages of operatives, if all
labour should cease till that advance were obtained.
The JUDGE :-That was the effect of the
resolution ? Witness:-Yes, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Did Stuart say anything
upon that ? He said something on taking the
He hoped noWhat did he say?
chair.
thing would be brought forward that would be
injurious, or that would bring either him or the
meeting within the pale of the law, but that, as he
had taken the chair, he would put such resolutions
as the meeting thought proper. What did WoodHe advocated the principle of the
roffe do.
resolution proposed. Where was he? On a
waggon.
The JUDGE :-Did Woodroffe propose that
resolution ? Witness :-Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Washeelevatedon a platform? Yes. In some kind of a pulpit? He
tvas in an elevated position. Can you remember
anything he said-anything particular? I left
the place about half-past nine o'clock. Was anything said as to who called the meeting? Woodroffe said he had been one of the persons calling
the meeting. Very well; are you able to speak

is a defendant here ? I saw nobody else who is
here.
The JUDGE :-You left the meeting at halfpast nine o'clock? Witness :-I did, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Were you at a meeting on
the 14th of August ? I was. That was a Sun-

day? It was. Where was the meeting held ?
On Thacker's growid. At what time ? It would
be a little after nine o'clock when I got there.
In the morning? It was, sir. Was there a cart
or waggon for the chairman? There was, sir.
Who was in the chair ? A person of the name of
Joseph Hilton.
TheJUDGE :-Is he a machanic? Witness:No, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-How was the meeting begun ? I do not know. O ! it was begun before
you got there, was it? It was, sir. Was there
any singing? There was one hymn sung.
The JUDGE :-A hymn? Witness :-One or
two verses, my Lord. Of 'a hymn? Yes, my
Lord. What was the hymn ?
Mr. DUNDAS:-There was no defendant present, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Was Challenger there ?
Witness. Yes.
The JUDGE :-Alexander Challenger? Yes,
my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Was any other defendant
there? Yes. Who was he? George Johnson.
George Johnson.
Who gave out the hymn?
Do you remember the nature of the hymn? I
recollect the first verse. What was it?
" A charge to keep I have;
A God to glorify;
A never dying soul to save,
And fit it for the sky."
After that hymn what did Johnson do ? He addressed the meeting, and gave them a religious
exhortation. Now while this was going on, did
the chairman take any partin the meeting ? No,
sir ; afterwards he did. After Johnson had done ?
After he had done, other persons cpLme and gave
exhortations. Then what did the chairman say ?
He said he had received a communication-he
knew not from whom, but he would read it to
the meeting. Did he read it aloud? Hlie did.
Do you remember wha't it was? It was to the
effect, that the committee had come to the determination that labour should not be resumed till
the Charter became the law of the land. Was
that the first thing that was said about the Charter or labour ? That was the first I heard. Was
There was nothing
there any thing further?
particular. At the time that announcement was
made a great consternation took place in the
meeting; there was some confusion as if the

15
people were dissatisfied.

Were Johnson and

Challenger present when the chairman read that
out? They were. Challenger was at the hinder
part of the chair, and Johnson was in front-a
little to his (the chairman's) right; both were in
the waggon. Is there a street called Stamford
Street in Ashton ? There is. Were you in Stamford Street on the 13th of August ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-What Street?
Mr. WORTLEY :-Stamford Street, my Lord.
(To witness) What time ?
At nine o'clock in the morning. What did you
see on going up the street on your way to the
townhall, at that time? I was a special constable
then, I had been sworn in on the 12th of August.
Well, what did you see in Stamford Street? I
saw a procession go up the street.
The JUDGE :-While acting as special constable? Witness:-Yes, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Describe the nature of
the procession? In passing up the street on the
Describe
right-hand side, my attention was -the procession at once; we have a great deal to
do and cannot hear unnecessary details. What
did the procession consist of? Of men, women;
and boys. How were they arranged? Four or
five men abreast in front, and a lot of women and
boys followed. Were there any other men besides those immediately in front? Yes, sir. The
largest of the men were in front; afterwards, the
women; and the boys in the order of size. Did
you know any of the four or five persons in front ?
I did. Who was that? Mr. Woodroffe.
The JUDGE :-He was not in front?
Mr. WORTLEY:-He was, my Lord. (To
witness) What number was there altogether ?
About 60 or 80 of men, women, and boys.
Were there any others there that you know to be
defendants ? No. Did you hear any thing said
by any of them as they passed? Yes. What
Which way did
was that? " Fall in, fall in."
they go ? Towards Stalybridge. How far did
you follow them ? As far as the Globe Inn, about
200 yards. How far is that out of Ashton? It
is in the town; it joins the north side of the
churchyard, in Stamford Street. Where were
you when you first saw them? I was below the
district bank when I first saw them. Were you
near them? I was within a few yards of them.
They left you, did they? Yes, sir. And went
on towards Stalybridge ? They did, sir.
The JUDGE:-How fpr is Stalybridge further to the east ? Witness :-It is about a mile
and a half east of Ashton, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-You go through Ashton
in going from Manchester to Stalybridge. If
your Lordship would look at that [handing the
fudge a map of the locality] you would see the

relative position of the places. How far is Duckinfield from Ashton? Duckinfield is close to
Ashton; the river divides them. And Hyde ?
Hyde is three or four miles from Ashten.
The JUDGE :-I may keep this map I suppose ?
Mr. WORTLEY:-You may, my Lord.
The JUDGE:-I suppose it is sufficiently accurate for our purpose. Stalybridge, I perceive
by this, is nearly east from Ashton ?
Mr. WORTLEY:-I cannot say, my Lord.
(To witness) Ashton, Duckinfield, Hyde, Stalybridge, and Mottram, are all near to each other?
Yes, within four or five miles of each other
little further to the east.
and Glossop is ~a
The JUDGE :-Nof, Mr. Dundas, you appear for Brooke ?
Mr. DUNDAS:-I appear for Brooke, my
Lord. (Cross examines the witness). And there
you lost sight of the women and the boys? Yes.
Pray what took you to the meeting on the 26th
of July? Having seen a placard on the walls,
sir. Was Wi. Aitkin a working man of any
kind? A schoolmaster, I have been given to
understand. Woodroffe was a shoemaker? Yes,
sir. You took notes, I dare say, of what passed
at that meeting? I did not, sir. You have a
very good memory? Tolerably, sir. You were
think you told us, on the
a special constable,
12th of August? I was, sir. Did you go to
a meeting after being sworn in as special constable? I went before. Did you go on your
own accord, or were you sent by any person? I
went on my own accord, sir. Is the bellman,
the bellman of the town ? Yes, Sir. Do any
magistrates live in the town? They do, sir.
How many magistrates live in Ashton? Three
or four, sir. Were they living at home at that
time? I do not know. Have you any doubt
about it? Witness :-On the 12th, sir ?
Mr. WORTLEY:-Yes. They were at the
Town Hall about 12 o'clock. What are you
for?
This is my summons to
"fumbling"
appear at the Town Hall on the 12th of August.
Had the bellman gone round before you received
your summons? He had.
The JUDGE :-The summons to go and be
sworn in as a special constable ? Witness :-Yes,
my Lord. I received my summons a little before the bellman went round.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Now go on to the Sunday
before that, the 14th of August, when you say
there was another meeting. What was Alexander
Challenger ? A factory operative, I believe.
What is George Johnson? I believe he is a
hatter. Is he a working, hatter, or a master
hatter, having people under him, and he sqlling
his own hats? I do not know, but I have

seen him in the shop at work. You say the
chairman gave exhortations, were they religious
exhortations ? I did not say that the chairman
gave exhortations.
The JUDGE :-No.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Well, other persons didwere they religious exhortations ? Witness:Yes, sir. How many people were at that meeting? Several thousands. There were several
thousands on Sunday in the chapel ? I did not
mention the chapel; I am speaking of the meeting on Thacker's ground.
The JUDGE :-I thought it was the meeting
in the Chapel.
Mr. DUNDAS :-So did I, my Lord.
Mr. MURPHY :-No, at the meeting on
Thacker's ground there were singing and exhortation, and Hilton was in the chair. Witness:You will find me correct.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Now, after the chairman
read out what you stated, you said there was
great dissatisfaction ? There was. How was
that expressed? By divisions of opinion, murmurs, and confusion. Divisions and murmurs?
Yes. The people werp put into a sort of moving
condition ; instead of sitting calm as before, they
became agitated. And how long did it last ? I
cannot tell-I came away while it was on the
way. While what was on the way? The dissatisfaction that appeared to seize the meeting.
While it was " agate," I suppose?
The JUDGE :-While the dissatisfaction was
going on you came away ? Witness :-Yes, my
Lord; I said Mr. DUNDAS :-Never mind what you said.
The JUDGE :-Mr. Baines, do you appear for
Scholefield ?
Mr. BAINES:-Yes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-Mr. Murphy, whom do you
appear for ?
Mr. MURPHY:-Johnson having repudiated
me, I appear only for Railton and Durham.
Mr. M'OUBREY:-My Lord, I appear for
James Mooney, John Thornton, and William
Aitkin.
Mr. ATHERTON:-I appear for Stephenson
and Fenton.
The JUDGE :--I will now take themin the
order in which they are in the indictment. Mr.
O'Connor, do you ask this witness any questions ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-No, my Lord.
The JUDGE:-Then I wish to know if any
of the other defendants wish to ask any questions?
George JOHNSON :-I wish to ask one, my
Lord.

The JUDGE :-By all means.
George JOHNSON: -I want to know whe.
ther the meetin to which he refers as having
been 'held on the 14th of August, did not com.
mence by prayer?
The JUDGE:-He says, in substance, that
he cannot tell how it began, because it began
before he got there. The first thing he heard
ithere was the hymn.
George JOHNSON:-Did not you swear before the Magistrates that there was no prayer at
that meeting ? Witness:-I am not aware. i
wish to ask you, and I hope you will tell the
truth, did not you swear positively before the
Magistrates that there was no prayer at that
meeting? I am not aware that it was men.
tioned; I can say something if you ask me
about the charter, Mr. Johnson.
The JUDGE :-Do not make a speech but
answer the question.
JOHNSON :-I want the truth. In my ex.
amination before the Magistrates did not you
swear that there was no prayer either at the
beginning or the end of that meeting?
The JUDGE :-He says he does not remember if there was any prayer; but there was a
hymn sung and some religious exhortations
given. Are there any other defendants who
wish to ask this witness any questions ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-No.
Mr. SERGEANT MURPHY:-My Lord, I
appear on behalf of Peter Murray M'Douall.
He is not here, but will abide the judgment of
the Court whatever it may be.
Henry Brierly (examined by Sir GREGORY
LEWIN). Where do you live? At Staly
bridge. What is your occupation? A factory
operative. On the 29th of July were you at a
meeting? Yes. Where was that meeting held ?
On a plot of ground called the Haigh, near Stalybridge, on the Manchester road. Do you know
in what manner that meeting was called together ?
I am not aware how it was called together. At
what time did you go to this meeting ? It was
near 8 o'clock. In the morning or evening ?
In the evening. What sort of# meeting was it ?
It was a large public meeting. Have you any
notion of the number of people there were there?
No. Hundreds, or thousands, or tens? Wel4
,there might be some hundreds there. Was there
any chairman ? Yes. Who was that? James
Fenton, of Ashton. Were you there when he
was called to the chair.? Yes.1 When he was
called to the chair was any difficulty raised ? No,
he was unanimously chosen. Well, when he took
the chair, was any thing particular said? No;

17
nothing particular. Well, after heh ad taken the
chair, what was done ? There was a resolution
moved. Who moved it? Well, I rather think
his name is Challenger. Did you know Challenger before? No.
The JUDGE :-Did you know him by sight ?
Witness:-No; I never saw him before.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Whatleqds you
to say his name was Challenger? He was called
so by the chairman. What was the nature of that
resolution ? That the present reduction of wages
was injurious, not only to the manufacturers and
labourers, but also to the shopkeepers and to all
classes of the community. Was that motion put
from the chair? Yes. Was it carried or not?
It was carried unanimously. Were there at that
time any other persone there you knew that you
can speak to now ? Yes, there was a man there
from Ashton, named Pilling.
The JUDGE :-Is he in the indictment?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--Yes, my Lord, he
is. I will tell you, my Lord, when any name is
mentioned that is not in the indictment.
(To the witness). Who else was there? A
man named Brophy was there.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He is not in the
indictment, my Lord. is
Mr.GREGORY :--He
Mr. GREGORY :-He is.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-O then he goes by
two names.
The JUDGE :-He is spelled Brossley here.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-I understand it
should be spelled Brophy, my Lord. (To the
Witness) Who else was there ?
Wm. Stephenson. Do you know a mari named
Storah ? ,No, but he was there. How do you
know ? He was called upon to speak.
The JUDGE :-You cannot make that
evidence, a person named Storah was there is all
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-That is all, my
Lord.
The JUDGE:-Then it is the same as a person
named Challenger ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-That is all my
Lord. (To the Witness) Well, what was done
after that ?
Another resolution was moved by Pilling.
What was the nature of that resolution? It
went to say,# that the reduction which was
made was injurious. It was something similar'
to the first-it wanted a fair day's wages for a
fair day's work. Was that resolution put from
the chair? Yes. Was it carried ? Yes. Was
IA tthe whole of the resolution, or was there any

Charter being made the law of the land. That is
as near what wis said as I can think. Do you
know who seconded that resolution? I do not
know, but I think his name was Milligan, or
something like that.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-His name is not
in the indictment, my Lord.
(To the witness). Was that resolution put
from the chair and carried? Yes. Was there
any opposition ? No. After this second resolution was carried, what was the next thing that
occurred? There was a third resolution. Who
moved it? I rather think that Brophy moved it.
Did you know him before? I never knew him
till he came to the town delivering teetotal lectures. But you knew him when he moved the
resolution? Yes. Who seconded it ? Storah.
Is that the same person who moved the other
resolution? Yes. What was the nature of it?
To draw up a memorial to Sir Robert Petl. for
For
10,000 stand of arms to be raised.
what purpose ? To protect the lives and property of the working classes against those who
refused to pay the property-tax. Were any particular persons mentioned as refusing to pay the
property-tax? No. Was it at the meeting at
the Haigh these resolutions were moved ? Yes
they were all moved at one time. Well, after the
third resolution was carried, what was the next
thing that occurred ? The meeting broke up
then. In what manner did they break up?
Peaceably. Before they broke up was there anything said from the chair? No, nothing particular. Was any notice given of breaking it up?
No. Was an adjournment moved ? No, not at
that meeting. 0 yes, there was anadjournment at
that meeting. Where did they adjourn to? They
adjourned to Hyde. Who moved the adjournment? I cannot say. Well, then, they adjourned to Hyde ? Yes, sir. At what time were they
to meet ? Well, I rather think it was on Saturday or Monday. Did the meeting take place at
Hyde-? Yes. Were you present? No, I was
not. .Did another meeting take place? Yes, and
it was adjourned to Duckinfield, and was held
either on the 2nd or 3rd of August. Were you
present? Yes. In the morning or evening ? In
the evening. What number of persons did you
find there ? A good number. Give us some notion
of it? Well, I think there was above a thousand.
Where did they meet? In the Hall Green. Was
any chairman appointed? A chairman had been
already appointed. When you got there what
did you see done? They were moving a second
resolution. Who moved it? Storah. Was that
the same man you saw at the other meeting ?
Yes. Who seconded it? I cannot say; they

thing more ? They were of opinion that a fair were up in a high room talking from a window.
Mr DUNDAS :-He has not got any person
day's wages could not be obtained without the
there.
a

18
Sir GREGORY LEWIN (To the witness):
-The mover of the resolution was called Storah?
Yes. And the same person was named Storah,
and called upon to speak at a former meeting? Yes.
Mr. DUNDAS :-How do you know that it
is this Storah, (the defendant)?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-He was called by
that name at a previous meeting.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord, it
may be at once necessary to take your lordship
opinion on this distinct point. Now, I will assume that the Storah, who spoke at the meeting,
is not the person called in the indictment by
that name; but then I say that the person
named Storah, (not the defendant), was present
at a former meeting where some of the defendants were also present. The Storah at that
meeting goes to another meeting, and what takes
place at this meeting and various other meetings
it is quite evident are connected. The indictment
charges that all the defendants conspired with
divers others, and this meeting, we are now
speaking of, is an adjournment of a former
reeting where some of the defendants were
present.
TTT'
r
TInei
JUDG

E

i t. t

TI
T

:-

at,

rnved

RULP pb
FIVVU,.

.. y

I

meeting were at this meeting, then no doubt it
would connect both in their objects. Well, by
proving only one to be present you are only
reducing it. It is only pulling out the horse's
tail hair by hair-one by one.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-There is an end
of your point.
Mr. DUNDAS (To the witness) :-What was
He was delivering a lecture.
Pilling doing?
Was there any other defendant there ? Challenger was there. Any other besides Challenger ?
I think Woolfenden was there, but I am not certain. You said the resolution was moved by
Stephenson ? Yes. What was the nature and
character of that resolution ? It was the same
as that moved at a former meeting. Which of
the three ? The middle one.
The JUDGE :-That is the second resolution
tnat wa move_ a tu

otne

men...,

that was moved at the other meeting.
Mr. MURPHY :-A fair day's wages for a fair
day's work, and something about the Charter.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN (To the witness) :The resolution was, that
Say it over agoin.
they were of opinion that it was injurious not
only to man and master, but also to all classes of
the community.
The JUDGE:-That the reduction of wages
was injurious ?

s my ?
adjourned from Hyde, and he was not at Hyde.
Yes, my Lord, and that they would cease
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.-I wish to
take your lordships opinion upon this point If working until they had a fair day's wages for
S your
lordships opinion upon this point
a fair
day's work; and they were of opinion
day's work; and they were ofIopinion
some of proved to he present atthen evidene ot that this could not be obtained except the Charing are the persons at this, a former meetthe general character of the meeting, and what
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-You say that
was going on, may be admitted., In Hunt's case
Pilling was delivering a lecture ? Yes. Was
so.
I am told it was expressly held this
kindherethe resolution put from the Chair and carried
Th UDGE-n a case of
Yes. Youof
JUDGE:n heard a
The acase this indherpart of Pilling's lecture ?
Yes. Just tell us as well as you can remember
you cannot prove exact coincidences it is so.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I understand the Attorney- what he lectured about. He lectured about the
general to dwell much upon this point that state of the country. Do you remember what he
Storah is the person in the indictment. No per- said? He said things were very bad, and that it
son is spoken of but a person of the name of was hard to get a living. He also exhorted them
Storah, and who that person is, he (the witness) to be peaceable and uiet, and to keep good order.
knows not, except that a person was so named Did you hear Challenger say any thing ? No,
does not know who were nothing particular. Did you hear Storah say
by the chairman. HIe
lecturing to the
they
evidence effect of the resolutions.weeWhich resolution?
at the other meeting. All we have in this per- anything ? No;
is, that there was a meeting at which
just now repeated. Did youhear
son, Storab, was present; but who the others are The one I have
what any of them said? No ; nly to keep peace,

we do not know, nor have we Storah indentifled as one of the defendants. They must prove
that Storah and some person at a former meeting are defendants, but it will not do to prove
that at this third meeting there were persons
proved to be present at a former meeting.
The JUDGE :-I think it will. If it had
been proved that 50 of the people at the former

half-past nine, when
last? Till
the meeting
law, and order. How long dia colleetion was

last? Till half-past nine, when a collection was
made to defray the expence of pQsting some
bills to call another meeting. Who proposed
that the collection should be made? It was proposed fromawindow. Wherewas theothermeeting
to be held? At Waterhead Mill, near Oldham.
Did the meetingadjourn? Yes. Where didthey

19
adjourn to ? To Droylsden. When was thej other meeting? Pilling was not there that
meeting to take place at Droys4en ? On the fol- night. What was done ? They delivered leclowing day. I believe you did not attend that tures. Of what nature? To keep "peace, law,
meeting ? No, 1 believe not. When did you and order," and try to obtain, the Charter by
next hear or see any thing of the nature you are lawful and legal means,-that is as much as I
speaking of? On Friday, the 5th of August, I know about it. At what time did they adjourn ?
was at home, and heard a shout of the pro. The meeting broke up about ten o'clock. Where
cession of Bayley's hafids then on the road. did they adjourn to, and when? There was to
Did you see them? No, I heard them. Did be another meeting in the morning. And was
you go out to see them? I did, and saw them there another meeting in the morning? Yes.
walking in a procession. Where was this ? At What da of the month ?
Mr. MURPHY :-The 6th.
Stalybridge. Some hundreds of them .were
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Did they meet the
coming from Bayley's mills. Where are Bayley's
mills ? They are within a mile of Stalybridge, next morning ? Witness :-Yes.
The JUDGE: -At what time?
At five
on the Duckinfield side. Did you join them ?
Yes. Where did they go to ? They went on a o'clock in the morning, which is the factory
plot of ground at Melton Green, near Cheetham's time, and went in procession through Duckinfactory. When they got there did they stop ? field to Hyde, and came ack through Newton.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Did they meet
Yes. Was there a meeting held ? No, there
was not. What did they do then?- The womener
Yes. Where? In
and a good many men sat down so that Cheet- again the same evening?
they returned through
stop. Where did
ham's hands could see themthe Haigh. When the sameI place. Whendispersed ?, Yes. They
they go to from there? To
Newton believe they
there did they choose a chairman? Yes. had to go for their wages, and they dispersl to
they got
hesame evening
Who was the person chosen? James Fenton. draw t
on the
the
were
How many persons Whomthere at this meeting you say they met again at that same plabe Where
evening.
did you see besides? Haigh ? Yes, they met
A large number.
James Fenton, Thomas Mahon. Any body else. there the same persons there? Yes. Any body
John Durham. Do you know a man of th else besides those persons you mentioned?
there. There
not1L __
LUO
on".
.
s +
name of Stephenson ? Yes ; he was
...
.
u ....
m
u
ka-,
These four, Stephenson, Fenton, Durham, and
Mahon, were there? Yes. What is Stephenson's Christian name? William. Who were
the speakers at this meeting? These were the
four principal speakers. Did you hear any thing
in particular that any of them said? No, nothing;
only they exhorted the people to stick out till
they had a fair day's wages, for a fair day's work.
Do you know if any of these four persons you
mentioned were of Bayley's work-people? No,
none of them. Were any resolutions moved at
this meeting ?
The JUDGE :--You don't know that any of
them were Bailey's hands?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-(To the Witness)
You called them Bailey's hands, did you not ?
Yes, theywere Bailey's hands: all of them.
The JUDGE :-The. procession people were
Bailey's hands?

Witness :-Yes.

Sir GREGORY LEWIN :--But the four
speakers you-mentioned were not part of Bayley's
work-people ? No. Well, now, how long did
this meeting, last? Perhaps it might last an
hour., Did they afterwards adjourn ? Yes, till
night. Well, at what time did they meet again?
Between seven and eight o'clock. Where? On
the Haigh. Durham, Stephenson, and Brophy
were there. The same four that you saw at the

not

0now the man.•wasthere atpethere

named Crossley ? I know him,but I cannot rethereother
any
collect seeing him there. Was
person there? Yes, a man from Liverpool who
came there to give a lecture. What did he say?
He said he was sorryto find the country in the
state it was in. He advised them to go to
their work again. Anything more? No, he said
he thought it was not possible to get the Charter,
and that the work-people ought rt to come out
for it. He gave them a very good lecture. Was
that the general opinion ? Yes, (witness was
leaving the box).
Mr. DUNDAS and Mr. MURPHY :-Stay,
stay !
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :--How was the
lecture received? Witness :-Favourably. Did
any one else speak? Yes, Brophy. What did
he say on the subject? He exhorted them to
turn teetotallers, and keep sober. How many
persons were present at this meeting of the evenAbout 8000 or
ing of the 6th of August?
10,000. Were any resolutions moved? No.
How long did the meeting last ? About two
Did you hear any other
hours and a half.
speeches? No, only from the Chairman who
opened the meeting. Who was the Chairman?
Fenton. Was there any other meeting? Yes,
they were' to go to a camp-meeting.

Where was

20
Did he say anything more to them ? Well, not
to my knowledge. Did he give any reasons for
saying there was little use in going to them?
No; he said they had come out for the Charter,
and they would stick to it.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Who said that ? Thomas
Mahon.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He is not one of
Bayley's hands? Witness,:-No, he is a shoemaker.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-On Mahon's
saying that, was there any show of hands taken ?
No. Well, what was doneon his saying that they
would not go ?-You say the meeting was broken
up-was it adjourned ? Yes; they were to go
on to the Haigh again, in the morning at five
o'clock. Were you at that meeting again on the
following morning? Yes. Who was there that
you knew? The same persons that addressed
the meeting in the morning. Who was in the
chair ? Fenton was in the chair. Brophy,
Stephenson, Mahon and Durham were present.
Was Crossley there ? I cannot recollect him.
Now, who addressed the meeting ? Brophy.
To what effect did he address the meeting? That
they might get the hands out from work. Tell,
as nearly as you can, the words that he used.
He stated that they must get them out by legal
means if possible, or stop them as they were
going to their work; that is chiefly what he said.
Did any other person speak besides Brophy ?
Yes, several of them spoke. Do you know
their names? Yes, Durham.- What did he
say ? He said they would have a procession
through Duckinfield and Ashton. For what
purpose ? To let them see that they were
out. Did any others that you knew say any
thing? No. Any of those that you have
named ?- Stephenson-Did he say any thing?
No. Or Mahon ?-No ;-only that he was going
through Ashton to have a procession. Did
Mahon and Stephenson say so ? Yes; after
breakfast they were going through Ashton, and
to have a procession. Did they do so ? Yes, the
body of the people then divided in several lots,
and fetched out all the hands of all the mills in
the town. Did you go with one of the parties ?
No, I went down to Caroline Street, to a house
there. When they had turned out the hands,
did they return to the Haigh? Yes. Did you
return there too? Yes. Was there a chairman
appointed ? No. Did any one address the meeting? Yes, Durham said, "Form in procession,
and put Bayley's hands out first, as they came
out first, and go in a procession through Ashton.
Can you tell We the order in which they went?
He told them to go peaceably. No I no!Mr. MURPHY :-Yes, I will have this; he
ordered them to go peaceably.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-I am not asking
said there was little use in going tothem.

it held ? It was held on Sunday the 7th of August, at Wedensough Green, usually called Mottram Moor. At that meeting how many persons
were present? Several thousands. Whowas the
chairman ? I don't know his name, but he was
the bellman of Hyde. That was on Sunday
morning? Yes. About what time? The church
bells were ringing just as they (the meeting) were
about to sing a hymn. Did any body address
the meeting? Yes. Who was that? I don't
know the name of all the persons who spoke.
Tell me one of them. William Stephenson
spoke. What did he say? Something about the
principles of the people's Charter. I believe there
was a hymn sung. In the afternoon a text was
taken from Isaiah. Was there any resolution
moved ?
The JUDGE :-You said something about
Isaiah. Witness :-A text was taken from the
10th of Isaiah.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Were any resolutions moved? None. Either in the morning
or afternoon? No, I did not hear any. Did
you stay till the end of the meeting ? No, I
came off just as it was going to close. I was
told afterwards that it was adjourned. We went
to the Haigh back again in the afternoon. Did
any thing take place there ? No, there was no
meeting; they only broke up there. Where was
the next meeting held? In a preaching-room,
called the Cave of the Adullamites, at the back
of the Moulder's Arms, in Vaudrey Street, Stalybridge.
The JUDGE :-On Sunday evening? Yes.
At what time ? About seven o'clock.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-How many persons were there ? About forty or fifty. Who
was there that you knew ? William Stephenson
and Thomas Mahon. Any body else that you
khew ? No. What was done ? There was no
lecturing. Was there any speaking? No, except ene to another. What was the general subject of conversation? Well, a man said, Mr.
William Bayley wanted to see the committee.
The working men had formed u cmeittee to go
and meet the mastets.
f
The JUDGE:-How do you know that,?
They do so in general when there is a 'turn out.'
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Were you present
when they were formed? I was present when.
one of the committee said he was one of the committee. Was Mahon present then? Yes, he was.
Well then, a person came in you say, and said
that Mr. William Bayley wished to see some of
the members of the committee ? Yes. What
took place then? Some of them thought it advisable to go, and others not. How came it to
be so determined that they would not go ? 1 Ma-

21
you that, but tell me the order in which they
went. They had colours and banners; and Durham, Stephenson, Mahon, Brophy, and several
others that I do not know, were in the procession.
Was Crossley there ? I saw him there as they
were going down Duckinfield brow, but he did
not set off with them. Who was he talking to ?
He was talking to Brophy. Were they together?
They were walking alongside of each other.
Where did they go to ? They went in procession
down Caroline-street and up Duckinfield brow
to Hindley's mill. Were they linked arm-inarm ? Yes, the procession was linked, four deep.
Had they any sticks ? No. Banners? Only
two or three colours. When they got to Hindmill what did they do there ? When the
ley's
hands heard the procession coming they stopped
the engine, and ' turned out' before the procession
arrived. Was there any mob collected ? No.
Was the procession of which you speak the first
people that got up to the mill, or did any procession get up to the mill before hand? A number of little boys and stragglers went to the mill
before the procession reached it.

was held at half-past fouro'clock. (To Witness)
Who were there? Durham, Stephenson and Leach
of Hyde.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-His name is John
Leach, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-Is that so ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Yes, my Lord.
Your Lordship may take that. (To Witness)
Was Crossley there ?
No; Crossley was not there. Was Candelet ?
No; I don't know any of them except those that
Pilling ?
belong to our own neighbourhood.
Did
No. Brophy? Brophy was not there.
anybody address the meeting ? Leach was addressing the meeting when I got up to it. What

was he saying? He told them it would be more
proper for them to stand out for the wage than
the Charter question. Did he give any reason
why ? Yes; he said it was impossible for them
to get the Charter at present. Was there anything more? There was no more, only he gave
them a lecture to that effect. What did Thomas
Mahon say ? He said "the Stalybridge people
The JUDGE :-You say that no mob was col- must meet on the Haigh in the morning; and
the Ashton people must meet near Thacker's
lected, and some other question was asked which
foundry." And have a procession, and go to
I did not hear.
Yes ; but they must take no
Manchester?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN: - I asked him
with them. Was that agreed to? Yes.
procession was the first that got up sticks
whether the
What is Leach of Hyde? I rather think he is a
to the mill, or whether anybody preceded it ?
tailor. Was there a meeting the next morning ?
and he said little boys went there before the proYes. Were you present? Yes.
cession.
The JUDGE :-What day was this ?
they are oft ready in runWITNESS:-Yes,
ning first; but the hands were out before either
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-It would be the
the boys or the procession got there : when the 9th of August. (To Witness) Were you at the
procession was going up the brow. By the hands Haigh ?
you mean Hindley's workmen? Yes. Is that
Yes. Who was there? The same men. Was
the only mill they stopped at? No; they went Challenger there? No. Storah? No. Was
that
through Ashton, and all the mills stopped
Fenton there? Yes; he gave them a lecture.
day. Now, I am speaking of the procession; Who was in the chair? Fenton was chiefly
did the procession stop at some of the mills ? chairman. Was Durham there?
Yes. SteAt some of them. 1 believe you left them in phenson? Yes. Brophy ? No. Crossley? I
them again during
Ashton? I did. Did you join
cannot recollect him. You say a lecture was
that day ? I went to Hyde. What time did you given by Fenton? Yes. Of what nature ? He
get there ? About half-past four o'clock. When was exhorting them to keep "peace, law, and
you got there, was there a meeting there? Yes. order" in the procession to Manchester. He told
What did you see done when you got there-? them to go peaceably, and keep good order.
They were fetching them out from the factories How long did this meeting last? It did not last
on Newton
moor. Who were doing so; any of long. They formed a procession, I suppose, after
them that came from Stalybridge ? None of the they had .had their breakfast, but I was not
men that came from Stalybridge was there. there. When you left them it was understood
Were there any of the persons there who attended that they were to form a procession to go to
Manchester ? Yes. Did you go to Ashton ? No.
the morning meeting ? Yes, Stephenson.
The JUDGE :-I beg your pardoa---You say Were you at Ashton that day, or at Thacker's
there were none of the people there who were at foundry ? No. " Did you see Pilling that day ?
No. Or Challenger ? No. What was the next
Stalybridge.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Yes, my Lord. thing you saw ? What-after that meeting broke
This was the meeting at 'Hyde, which mineeting Up ?

22
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Yes. There was.
a meeting at the Haigh that morning.
The JUDGE :--What time was that ? Five
o'clock.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN: - Whp were
there? Fenton, Stephenson, Durham, and
Mahon. Who else? None else that I know.
How many persons might there be present? Not
many; they were to go to Glossop that day.
How long did that meeting last ? About an hour
and a half, perhaps. Was Crossley there? No,
I did not see him. Who were the principal
speakers ? Fenton and Durham. What did
they speak about? They were to go in peaceable, good order to Glossop, and see how the
Glossop people were coming on. Did they say
what they meant by " how the Glossop people
were coming on? " No; I don't know what
they meant by it. Did you go to Glossop with
them? No. You saw them the next morning
(the 11th) on the Haigh? Yes; they were
falling out that morning. What were they falling
out about? Between the wage question and the
Charter. Who was in the chair? Fenton, I
think: he was giving them a lecture on the wage
question: he said it was more proper to cQntend
for one thing at once. Who took tLe opposite
side? Durham was also in favour of the wage
question,
The JUDGE :-Fenton said one thing at a time
was enough ? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Well, what did
the others say ? They said they might as well
contend for the Charter. Who were the others.?
Stephenson and Mahon. Did Crossley say anything? No; he was not there to my knowledge.
Do you mean that he was not there on the morning of the 11th ? No; not -to my knowledge.
Where did you see Crossley that day ? I saw
them going to take awalk to "Bill's O'Jacs-"
Where did you see Crossley ? I saw Crossley
that morning with the procession, going towards
'Greenfield. How did the falling out between
'the Charter and the wage question end ? They
were to have a meeting in Hyde on the question,
and they were to be ruled by the majority,
SThe JUDGE :-That was said at the meeting
on the Haigh in the morning? Yes, my Lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Well, was there
a meeting at Hyde? Yes, there was a meeting
in Hyde, but I was not there.- You know nothing
about it? They met every morning at five o'clock
at the Haigh. Then what did you meet for every
morning ? They told them that they must go to
their work on that plot of ground.' What work
were they to go to ? Well, to their spinxing and
weaving, for anything I know. They made it a
regular phrase among themselves that they were

going to their work. Did you hear any other
speakers ? No, I cannot recollect. Well, what
did they meet for ? You say you attended these
meetings every morning at five o'clock-what
did they meet for on the Haigh? To keep them
combined together.
,The JUDGE :-The people said they were
going to their work ? Yes, they always said in
the morning they were going to their work, and
then they went to the Haigh; they always met
peaceably and quietly.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--I ask you what
they met for ? To have lectures. Well, what
was the nature of the lectures on the morning of
the 12th ? On the wage question-" a fair day's
wages for a fair day's work." Was there anything said about mills or factories ? No. Well
now, on the 13th they arrived at Stalybridge from
Glossop ? Yes. You saw the procession after it
arrived ?
, The JUDGE:-AtStalybridge? Witness:Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-When the procession came, who was with it? I did not know
any of them. Was it joined by any body at
Stalybridge? There was a public meeting there;
Durhm, Stephenson, Mahon, and Fenton were
present.
an
present.Cd
Dawson? Nay; I did
not say Crossley. Who was in the chair ? A
notsay rshln. What s is chair d
nthe
not hear him proposed. Do you know a man
named Wilde? I rather think that was his name.
I heard them call out-" Pull him down out of
the chair."
Do you know a person named
Aitkin? Yes, he was there; Millington was
there; Leach, of Hyde, was there; Johnson,
from Ashton, was there. They had liked to
have thrown 'Wilde and Johnson out of the cart,
and Fenton too. Was Lees there? No. Do you
know General Lees? No. Who were the
speakers? Wilde opened the meeting for the
wage question.
The JUDGE :-You mean in favour of the
wage question ? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Well, what did
they say they would do ? They were talking of
sending delegates to the manufacturing districts,
to ascertain which of the masters were giving
most and least wages, and to draw a list up between both so as that the hands could go to their
work. Something in the happy medium, I sup-'
pose? Yes. What were they to doin the meantime ? They, were to hold their meetings as
usual, and keep "peace, law, and order." And
what were the operatives to do ?-Were they to
go to work in the meantime ? They could not
go to work for the masters had shut up their
mill-doors for a month. When was it their mas.

23
ters agreed to shut up the mill-doors ? After they
had turned out, the masters agreed not to let them
in again for a month. Was there another meeting on that same day (the 13th), or only one meeting ? Only one. Was there a great many persons
present ? Yes, in Glossop. How many thousands ? There might be 10,000 or 12,000. Was
any resolution moved? Somebody moved a resolution to the effect that we should have the
Charter. Who moved that ? I don't know: I
could not get up near enough to hear. Well, as
near as you can recollect ? I did not hear it. I
heard a resolution at the time they were pulling
Wilde and Pilling out of the chair. Was anything said about the hands-what they were to
do ? No, only that they were to keep "peace,
law, and order," and be peaceable and quiet,
until the Charter was obtained? No. There
was a resolution passed that they were to stick
out for the Charter, but it was forced on them
by the Glossop people, who came every one of
them armed with bludgeons and great sticks.
The JUDGE :-This resolution about having
the Charter was forced on them by persons from
Glossop, who came armed with sticks and bludgeons ? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN: -Was
there
another meeting on Sunday forenoon? Yes.
Was there any question then raised? No; there
were very few people there. Well, but there
may be questions raised by a few people, as well
as by a great many ? It was a camp-meeting.
Who was there ? I saw Win. Stephenson there.
He was the only person there that I knew.
What did they do ? They sang and prayed.
Was there anything about the Charter? No,
nothing in the forenoon. Well, was there in the
afternoon ? Well, I left Woolfenden beginning a
a lecture. You say there was something about
the Charter? It was a camp meeting. That was
in the morning ? Yes, and in the afternoon too.
Well, was there anything about the Charter in
the afternoon? Well, I told you that I left
Woolfenden beginning a lecture in the afternoon.
What was that lecture about? Woolfenden was
taking a text, but I left and went to church.
Did you hear the Charter mentioned that evening? Yes. By whom? By Woolfenden and
Stephenson, but not in connection with the wage
question, or with the hands. Well, what did he
say about the Charter ? He said he hoped the
people woyld ebtain the Charter.
The JUDGE :-Who said that? Woolfenden,
my Lord: but he thought it would be sometime
before it would be obtained.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-When did you
next attend? In the evening. Where was the
meeting in the evening? In the same place.

The JUDGE :-Then you went to church,
and had another meeting in the evening?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Did you know any
body at that meeting? Yes. Was Durham'there?
No. Was Mahon there? He camebefore the meeting was over. Was Woolfenden there? No. Who
else was there? A gentleman from Manchester.
Had he but one arm? Yes. What did he lecture
upon ? He said he was very sorry the people in
that part of the country were outof work. It hurt
his feelings to think they had come out for the
Charter, for he thought they could not obtain it.
Did any body else speak about the Charter at that
meeting ? Yes, they lectured about it. Who lectured about it? Another man did, but I don't
know who he is. Were the speeches you heard
in favour of or against the Charter ? They were
both against it and for it. Now, on the morning
of the 15th, was there another meeting ? Yes.
Where was that meeting ? In the same place.
Who attended that meeting ? I do not know.
Was Fenton there? Yes. Stephenson? Yes.
. Was Crossley
Mahon? Yes. Durham?
there? I cannot recollect him. How long have
you known Crossley? Well, the first time I knew
him, he was chairman at an Anti-corn-law Meeting. How long ago was that? Sometime, perhaps in May or June, when Falvey was giving a
lecture Now, at this meeting of the 15th, was
Aitkin present ? Yes. Did a discussion take
place ? Yes. What about ? Between the Charter
and the wage question. Who spoke ? There
were several speakers that had not been there before. Who spoke in favour of the Charter ?
Mahon and Stephenson. What did they say?
They said they might as well contend for both as
one. Did they give any advice ? No, it was ruled
by a majoity of the people. But what did they
say ? They said they would go on with the majority of the people.
The JUDGE :-Did the meeting say that, or
was it Mahon and Stephenson that said so?
Mahon and Stephenson.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Did they say any
thing about wages ? Yes; they said they must
have " a fair day's wages for a fair day's work."
Did they say anything more ? No. Did they say
anything about what the operatives were to do ?
To keep "peace, law, and order," attend their
meetings, and injure no person. You know the
Chartist Association room? Yes. Was there a
meeting there ? There was one called. Were you
present? Yes:
The JUDGE :-On that same day ? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Now tell me what
took place there? A piece was read out of the
Northern Star, about appointing delegates to go
to the conference in Manchester.

24
The JUDGE :-He says something was read
from a newspaper.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I take your
Lordship's objection.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Whowas there?
Mahon was there, but there was no chairman
there. Well, I do not ask you that. Was Stephenson there? No. Fenton ? No. Crosley?
No. Aitkin? No. Pilling? No. Mahon is the
only one I can name. He read something from a
newspaper; and he was to go to Manchester as a
delegate. Was he elected to go? There was not
a meeting to elect him ; they were to have another
meeting before he went. What was that other
meeting for ? To elect him. You mean that that
was suggested at this meeting, and that he was
the person to be elected to go? Yes.
Tfhe JUDGE :-He was the person they approved of, and another meeting was to be held
to elect him ? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant MURPHY:
-Pray sir, what are you by occupation? I am a
carder in a cotton factory. Were you acting as
one of the turn-outs on that occasion ? No. Have
you ever had experience of a turn-out before in a
cotton factory ? Yes. Had that turn-out extended
to more than one factory ? Yes, to several; they
were all stopped for eleven or twelve weeks. How
long previous to this period was it? Twelve years,
on the 4th of December. May I ask you whether,
on the occasion of that turn-out, there was any
mention among the public of a Charter being obtained at that time ? No; no mention whatever.
Nbw, was there not, on that occasion, a general
committee appointed among the working classes,
to'direct the movement of the turn-out? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Twelve yearsMr. MURPHY .- Yes, twelve years ago.
The JUDGE :-To direct the movement of
the people's "turn-out ?"
Mr. MURPHY :-Yes, my Lord. (To Witness)-Was not one of the objects of that committee to treat with the masters, and adjust
the wages between them and the operatives?
Witness:-Yes. Did that "turn-out" confine
itself to the factories in the neighbourhood-of one
particular town, or did it extend and ramify itself'
over the whole of Lancashire generally ? There
were then fifty-two masters obliged to stop their
mills, because the masters would not let them
work in consequence of the turn-out.
The JUDGE :-Because we would not let
them work? The masters would not let them
work.
Mr.MURPHY:-The masters would not let
them return to their workin consequence of the

turn-out. (To the witness)-I understood you to
mean that twelve years ago a similar resolution
had been come to on the part of the masters ?
Yes. Now are you aware whether, on the occasion of that previous turn-out, delegates were sent
to the various factories, and from one district to
another, to watch the proceedings of the turn-out?
Yes, there were delegates appointed for such a
purpose on that occasion. Do you recollect any
processions at that time? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- I do not
know in what way my learned friend wishes to
connect what occurred twelve years ago with
the present case. I suppose he does not mean
to justify it. A mere passing allusion to explain
how it affects the evidence is all I require.
The JUDGE:-I thought as the crossexamination was going on, that the object of
it was to show that the fact of delegates having
been appointed, twelve years ago, to go from one
factory to another to ascertain what were the
proceedings of the different turn-outs,would not
per se be criminal.
Mr. MURPHY:-My Lord, my object is,
clear-it is perfectly obvious. The AttorneyGeneral suggests that all this turn-out' is connected with the Charter, and some vast conspiracy for the promotion of Chartist principles
throughout the country. I want to show that
when no Charter was spoken of similar conduct
took place.
The. JUDGE :-I do not think that is strictly
admissible. A procession is either legal or
illegal; if legal, we do not want to justify it by
a reference to similar things done before; if
illegal, then to show that similar things were
done on a former occasion would not justify it.
I thought, however, it would be evidence as
tending to show what is the meaning of appointing delegates.
Mr. MURPHY :-They' appointed delegates
to go and enquire what masters were paying the
highest and lowest prices, and to strike a medium.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Confling it
to that object it might not be illegal.
Mr. MURPHY (To Witness) :-'You instanced one place where a few little boys were
before a procession? Yes. Now, is itnot always
the way that the hands employed in factories
turn-out voluritarily as a procession comes up ?
That is the practice. At all the meetings you
attended, where mention was made of a fair day's
wages for a fair day's work, was not "peace, law,
and order inculcated ?" Yes, on all occasions.
Mr. WORTLEY :-I1 hope the order will be

25
repeated to desire all witnesses, to got o ft
i under notice if they did not consent to a reduc
tion of 25 per cent, on their wages ? Yes. If
Court, except those who have been examined,
they did not consent to a reduction then they
(Orders to that effect were then given.)
were to give over? Yes. Then you.spoke of
(Cross-examined by. Mr. ATHERTON).:In August last were:not wages very low in Ash. severa1gatherings of Bayley's men being in adton, Stalybridge, &c. ? Yes. Is it not also a vance of the processions, and taking part in the
fact, that a greatdeal of dissatisfactionand grumb- turn-out? Yes, they were always the first.
ling took place among the shopkeepers on that Now, I understood youto say, that when a proaccount? Yes. So that both the workpeople position was made for them to return to their
and shopkeepers weredissatisfied on that acconit ? work, that they said there was no use in doing
Yes; and a great many could not get half meat so, because the masters said they (the hands)
enough. Many persons were out of work,, and ishould remain out foramonth? Yes. Did you,
many in it were, very poorly paid ? Yes. That or did you not hear that Bayley's hands comwas notoriously the case in all those places. Yes. plained that their masters told them to play for
Isit not also a fact that wages, for some consider- a month ?-Did you, or did you not hear that ?
able time previous, had been greatlydecliningand Yes.
This, my Lord, I put, because Sir Gregory
getting lower and lower ? Yes, for the last sixteen or seventeen years. General distress was. Lewii seemed to think, from what the witness
said, that it was the men themselves that refused
prevailing ? Yes.
The JUDGE:--For sixteen or- seventeen to go back,
The JUDGE :-(To the witness) Was that
years ? Yes, ever since the year 1826.
Mr. ATHERTON :--Now, on the occasion of the way you put it ? Yes, my Lord, they (the
any of the meetings of which you have spoken, mill-hands) said there was no; use in going
did you ever witness any interference on the part back# because the mill-doors were locked.
of the shopkeepers, or.any attempt on their part ,
Mr. O'CONNOR: - Now, you brought
to prevent those meetings, or to dissuade the your narrative down from the first meeting of
people from holding them ? No. The shop- the 5th of August to the meeting of the 15th,
keepers had meetings-themselves, and said they when Mahn was nominated as adelegate? Yes.
would support them, and thus enable them to keep Do you remember any meetings after the 15th?
out till their wages were raised. During all this Yes, O yes, they kept meeting, and they opened
time none of the shopkeepers, or other classes of the chapel doors for them. Who opened the
workmen, interfered to dissuade the people from cbhapel doors for them.? Well, some of the
.
The' owners of the
holding these meetings ? I don't understand that leaders of the chapels.
word. No persons, shopkeepers, or others came chapels? Yes. Did they open those chapels
to those meetings to tell the work-people to give because they commisserated them, as they were
them up.-They were not interfered with ? out ofwork? ' Yes. Becase they felt for them ?
No, not to the best of my knowledge. You say Yes. They were not Chartists Who opened the
no attempt was made to interfere with them? No. chapels ? No. What chapels were opened fbr
(Cross.examined by Mr. Mc Oubrey) :-Pray, them? The "New Connexion" chapel was
sir, what are you? A carder. (Cross-examined one. Now, you have spoken of meetings of shopby Mr. Feargus O'Connor):-I think in the keepers to assistThe'JUDGE :-Thte new what ?
commencement of your examination youwspoke
Mr. MURPHY :-The " New Connoxion"-of "wakes" ? Yes. Are those times in-whicf
strangers come from all parts of' the country o the new Methodist Connexion, my Lord.' Wite
o
take part in the amusements ?newet
to be sure.
MOessN:--Yes,
The JUDGE :-The" wakes ?" Ido not' reMr. O'CONNOR :-Yon spoke- of' meetings
collectmentioning it.
his
of shopkeepers to assist the working men while
Mr.O'CONNOR: Hedid, my Lord, inthe, they were out? Yes., Did you at any of those
commencement. These are annual feasts, meetings hear complaints made of the masters
and
strangers come from all parts of the country to for turning them opt? I was not at the shopkeepers' meetings; they had them in the Town
where the wakes are held. Witness :-Yei.
you spolke of as of anryim. Hall. Did-you hearg.nerally-m-was it a rumour.
The first gathering
portance was on the,5th of August ? Yes. You or merely expressed. in conversation, that the
thenspoke of the "turn-outs" at Bayley'smnills masters had turned the men out, and that the
sitting opposite Cheetham's mills-Bayley samen men were much commisserated on that account,?
are youaware, or have you Yes. Now, having attended all those meetings
leadingthe van; nowthe handsinjayley
understood that all
mills, from place to place-but I ow long didthey
received notice to leave their work ? Were they

meet last?

From Saturday evening to Thursday

26
mnorning. Now, did you see at all these meet.
ings one breach of thepeace ? No.
The JUDGE :-When did the " wakes" be.
gin ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-They began on Saturday
-n4 ended on Thursday, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-What Saturday? Witness:the Saturday before St. James's day. Was it in
August ? No; it was before August. How
mnuch before August were these wakes ? A week
before: from Saturday to Thursday.
Mr. WORTLEY :-St. James's day was on
ithe 25th of July.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Did not Bayley's hands
go up in a body to request to be admitted to
work ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Were you
there when they did so? No; but many of
Bayley's hands live near me.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-It is a thing as well
known as any other fact you have sworn to ?
Yes.
The JUDGE :-Did you see them going? I
did.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-You say that in one of
the speeches the chairman desired them to be
peaceable, and that Brophy desired them to be
teetotallers ? Yes. And on that suggestion you
,sawthem all peaceable? Yes. No opposition,
and not one breach of the peace ? No. When
did the men begin to return to their work? I
Platt's men were about a month out: they
h-think
returned on a Friday, the latter end of August.
Cian you remember the day of the month ? No.
Did they begin to return generally, or progres,sively, and by degrees, till things came to the
present state ? Some of them would not open
the doors till the month was out.
The JUDGE:-Some of the masters? Yes.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Were the men ready to
go back? Yes, they were. What day was
Mahon nominated as a delegate? On Sunday,
the 15th of August.
The JUDGE :--The 15th of August was
Monday.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-About the 25th of August, the whole question about wages and the
Charter was given up ? Yes.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-How many mills or factories did you
see turned out? A procession went through
Ashton. Were you at Bayley's? Bayley's were
out. Were you at Cheetham's? The Cheetham's did not open their doors till Monday
morning. Did any. procession go there? Yes,
on the Friday, to the back-side of the New-mill,
but not to turn them out. Did you go to Lees's ?
,We did not. How far were you from Lees's?

I was on the bridge when Lees's hands wer,
fetched out. I observe, you say" fetched out,"what do you mean by "fetched out ?" Turned
out- coming out. Did you see anything of that
transaction at all ? No; I did not. Were you
at as many as four or five mills ? O ! there were
four or five mills there altogether. Were you
there? I was on the bridge. When were you
at Leesls ?-Did you see them turned out? They
came out themselves. Did you see them ? I
was not at Lees's; I was on the river-bridge.
I was informed how the door was broken. Did
you see it ? No; I did not go so far. You said
no breach of the peace ? No, I did not, for my
part. Were you present when any mob or procession got to three or four mills ? I was in the
street.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-He has spoken generally
to that fact, that all the mills in Ashton stopped
on that day.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-How many
are there? Great numbers. 25 or 30 ? I dare
say there are. Did you see in any instance what
took place when the people came out of the mill ?
They joined the procession. Did you see how it
was that they joined the procession ?-whether
they came out of their own accord, or were turned
out ? They came out of their own accord generally. But did you see any instances where they
did not come out of their own accord ? No, I did
not.
Win. Clayton, constable of Hyde, examined by
Mr. HILDYARD:-Are you constable of Hyde?
Yes. Were you present t a plot of ground near
the Sportsian's Inn, on te first of August last?
I was.

How many persons were there? About

2000 persons were assembled there. Do you
know any person who acted as chairman at that
meeting ? Yes, George Candelet. Was there a
platform? There was a cart which served as a
hustings. Was the meeting addressed by several
persons ? It was. Will you mention some of
the persons who addressed the meeting ? George
Candelbt, John Leach, and Robert Wilde.
The JUDGE :-Is Wilde one of the defendants ?
Mr. HILDYARD :-No, my Lord, his name
is mentioned in connnexion with other proceedings. (To witness) Who else was there?
Win. Muirhouse. There was an Irishman
there whose name I don't know. Was there a
resolution put by Candelet ? Yes. What was it ?
That, if there was another reduction of wages
offered by their masters, would they (the hands)
one and all turn out ? Was that resolution carried at that meeting ? It was; there was a cry of
"Yes ! " "Yes !" Did tandelet, the chairman, announce that the resolution was carried at
the meeting? He did. He proposed a show of

27
Mr. HILDYARD:-There has been a new
uinds to that effect. Whe informed that it was
carried did Candelet say anything ? Their was a act for that, my Lord. (To the witness) Did
general shew of hands. Did Candelet address you attend a meeting in August last ?
the meeting? He did. What did he say ? He
Yes; I attended a meeting on the 7th of Ausaid, " I hope you, men of Hyde, will be true to gust, on Wedensough Green, commonly called
one another, and then we will soon have our Mottram Moor. I wrote notes of what occurred,
rights: that will be the Charter and nothing but which (notes) I took immediately after the meetthe Charter." The other speakers then followed ing. If the Court will allow me, I will produce
turn; and, after announcing that a meeting them.
would take place the following Sunday mornMr. DUNDAS :-How soon after the meeting, at Wedensough Green (Mottram Moor), at ing was over? The same day, in the afternoon;
nine o'clock, the meeting broke up. Do you re- perhaps an hour after the meeting.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Did you on every occasion
member Monday, the 8th of August ? Mr.
Little, special high-constable, attended a meeting make your notes as soon as you could after the
on that day. Do you remember any procession meeting ? Witness:-Yes, sir.
The JUDGE :-As soon as you could ? Yes
coming to town on that day ? Yes. Did a procession enter the town of Hyde on that day ? I my Lord.
saw a procession enter the town. From what
Mr. POLLOCK :-Well, how long after the
direction did they come ? From towards Newton. meeting did you make your notes?
Mr. DUNDAS:-You may save yourself the
What might be their numbers, speaking roughly?
They might be 700 or 800. Had they anything trouble of asking him any more questions on that
in their hands ? Some few of them had sticks. point.
Mr. POLLOCK:-Well, look to your notes,
What did that procession proceed to do ? I did
not take any notice of them. Was there a sus- and say how many people were at this meeting ?
pension of labour at Hyde from Monday the 8th Witness :-The meeting took place in the morn*
of August for some time? Yes, sir; there was. ing about half-past ten o'clock. There were about
Was there a meeting in the market-place of Hyde 400 people present. Were any of the defendants
for some time ? I do not know.
present ? George Candelet was there. Who wa&
The JUDGE :-Can you say for how long acting as chairman ? William Muirhouse. Were
any speeches made? There were. Who spoke ?
from the 8th of August ? No.
you remember the Muirhouse spoke. What did he say? In the
Mr. HILDYARD:-Do
meeting on Thursday, the 1l1th of August? No, I morning he said, "My friends and fellow-work.
don't. You do not know any thing of that meet- men,-I am appointed chairman to this meeting.
ing? No. Nor of Thursday, the lth of August? and must inform you that w re not met here
No. Do you remember any meeting where John for a wage question, or for a religious question."
Mr. DUNDAS:-Is that what you said you
Crossley acted as chairman? No. On Friday,
Witness:-It
the 12th of August, can you, to your knowledge, took down immediately after?inabook? Thi.
was
it
speak of any meeting taking place in the market- is. I thought you said
place? There was a meeting, but the particulars is what I took down in a publichouse immeof it I do not know. On Wednesday, the 17th of diately afterwards. Have you anything in your
August, did any meeting or meetings take place book that you took down before that? Moorwithin your knowledge? I believe there was. Are house's speech, which I took down in the bookl
you able to speak to the particulars? I believe I on the 7th of August. Did you take it dows
am not, sir. On the 18th of August, are you able on that piece of paper in your hand,-and not
I am not. Are you into the book first? I took it down on this paper
to speak to any meeting?
able to speak to any meeting after that-to any -this is the first I have had in writing about it.
(Witness proceeds with the speech of Muirother meeting? I am not, sir.
but I
:-Is there any defendant who house)-" It is for a national question;
The JUDGE
No will not intrude on your time, as you will be adwishes to ask this witness any questions?awdressed by my brother Chartists from Staly.
bridge, Ashton, Hyde, and other places, who are
Joseph Little, examined by Mr. POLLOCK: more able to address you than I. They will
-What are you? Special high-constable of explain that we, as Chartists, are met here for a
Hyde. Were you acting as special high-con- national question. You will be addressed by"and then he turned round to the cart and called
stable in last August?
The JUDGE :-As special what? Witness :- upon some man, who was a stranger, my Lordp
and I did not know him.
I am special high-constable, my Lord.
T

Mr. D

NDAS
.

I is a new of-ice, my Lord. He commenced speaking, and [ came away.

28
Was that all you heard at that meeting? It was
all I took notes of at that meeting. You have
already mentioned Candelet-do you know-any
one else who wag there ? No. Were you in the
afternoon at another meeting, somewhere else?
I was. At what time of day was it? It took
place about two o'clock in the afternoon. How
many people were there ? There was a much
larger number than what was at the other meeting-about 700 or 800. Who was in the chair ?
William Muirhouse. Who else was at the meeting? Robert Wilde, John Leach, and George
Candelet. I was told the names of ethers but
I could not swear to them. Who spoke? Muirhouse spoke. What did he say ? At the close of
the meeting, in the afternoon, he said," You
people have been told the evils that we labour
under, and I am requested also to tell you that
to-morrow a meeting will take place at Stalybridge, at five o'clock in the morning, when we
will proceed from factory to factory, and all hands
that will not willingly come out we will turn them
out. And, friends, when we are out, we will remain out, until the Charter, which is the only
guarantee you have for your wages, become the
law of the land. I hope to meet you all to-morrow morning at Stalybridge; when we will join
hand-in-hand at this great national turn-out."
Who else spoke? George Candelet. What did
he say ? I don't think I have notes of it.
Mr. DUNDAS:-When did you make that
note? The same day, when I went home. Was
it put into that book originally ? Yes; I keep a
leger daily, for years, and it was put in there.
Mr. POLLOCK :-I believe it is your duty to
make a report of every thing that happens, in
order that you may lay it before the magistrates?
Yes. What did Leach say ? He began by pointing towards me, and said there is one of the
government men, who is like the black-coated
gentleman who attends yon place. (He then
pointed to a church near Wedensough Green).
Built for a good purpose, but now filled by
thieves and rogues of the cotton fraternity; but
we would all be parsons and blue-bottles, if we
were all paid by government, as they are, 801.
a yearMr. POLLOCK:-What do you -understand
by blue-bottles? It is a name they give the
Manchester -police.--W-itness proceeds-a nice
sum for a man working one day out of sevenadaa man looking after us honest, poor, industrious labourers; but let me tell you, that the
6hurch isan open hell, filled by the cotton lords,
who are a set of.hieves and rogues ; and goodhonest people they'll not allow to enter. IBut,
friends, let us be true one -toanoter; theres
property in this plentiful neettry 1ffidient
6n nees.
foris all. If youhve ntotthe tot

saries of life, take them; and, who can stand
against you? None. The prisons are full: in the
prisons they don't want you. The police are in
no fault. I wishyou all to be quiet. You must
not damage property or persons; but above all
keep out of public-houses. To-morrow there
will be a general turn-out in both the counties
of Cheshire and Lancashire; and the Charter will
then be obtained. He wished them to be true to
one another, and they would gain their object.
Is that the whole of Leach's speech? It is all
I have taken down. He said more, but I could
not retain it in memory. Did any one else
speak? There were many others who addressed
the meeting, but I have no more notes. Did
Candelet speak ? He did, but I have no notes'of
what he said. When did the meeting break up?
About five o'clock. Was there anything said
about meeting again ? Muirhouse said they would
meet again at Stalybridge, the following morning,
at five o'clock. When was the next meeting you
attended? The day following, in the marketplace at Hyde. Who was present on that occasion? John Leach and George Candelet. Any
one else? Win. Muirhouse, and a man named
Stephenson, whom I did not know; he his a
stranger to me. Who was chairman? I do not
remember; I do not think there was a chairman
chosen. Were there any speeches made ? There
were. Have you a note of them? I have not.
What was the effect of them ? Recommending
the people to remain out, as they were out, till
the Charter became the law of the land. Was
anything said at that meeting about when they
should meet again? Muirhouse said a meeting
should take place at five o'clock the following
morning. Mr. O'Connor :-Was this on the
eighth ? Yes. You have no notes of what took
place at that meeting ? No.
The JUDGE :--rThey are speeches generally, recommending the people to remain out
till the Charter becomes the law of the laud;that is all he has.
Mr. POLLOCK :-When was the next meeting they had? They dispersed from that meeting about eight o'clock the same evening, and
went away to their homes peaceably, and all
was very quiet. When was the next meeting
you attended ? The following morning. When
was that? On Tuesday, the 9th of August, in
the market-place at Hyde.
The JUDGE :-At what time in the morning? Five o'clock in the morning, my Lord.
Mr.'POLLOCK :--Who were present at that
M
meeting ? ,urhouse, the chairman, John
Leach, md George -Gandelet. Any one else

29
who spoke at that meeting? They, all three,
spoke. Have you notes of the speeches ? I have
of Leach's. Leach informed the meeting that
they intended to go and join the Ashton people;
they intended to go to Ashton; and from Ashton
they said they would go to the Exchange, in
Manchester, where they would meet the cotton
tords, and he doubted not but they would have
the advance. Of wages ? I understood it to be
-wages. Anything else? And never to go to
work till they had either the advance or the
Charter. Do you remember anything else that
was said at that meeting ? I do not, sir. Was
there an adjournment made of it ?\There was a
meeting in the evening, sir. Where was the
meeting in the evening? In the market-place
at Hyde. I passed at the time the meeting was
there, but I was engaged with the Magistrates,
and could not attend. Do you remember when
Hyde-when Horsea number of people came to
field's mills were stopped? I think it was on
Tuesday, the 9th. I saw a number of peoplesome thousands, go towards the mill. When
was this ? It was either on Monday or Tuesday,
I won't swear which. How many people were
there ? Some thousands. Not going in any
order? No. From which direction were they
coming ? From Ashton and Stalybridge towards
Hyde. It was in Hyde you saw them ? I saw
them coming from Newton and pass through
Hyde-lane, towards Messrs. Horsefield's mill.
Was there any other mill stopped that day ? I
,am not sure, but the hands were out of all the
mills that day. You were not present ? I was
Dot. Was there a meeting held in Hyde that
day? I spoke to a meeting which was held here
that day. On the 10th of August was there a
meeting? On Wednesday, August the 10th, there:
was a meeting in the morning. Where was it ?
In the market-place at Hyde. Whom did you
see there? The same speakers: John Leach,
William Muirhouse, and George Candelet. Have
you notes of any speeches made at that meet-,
ing? I have merely an outline- I have not
taken it word for word. Can you give us,
the substance of what was said? The speaiers
desired the people to be quiet, and Muirhouse,
told them that they were to proceed to
Compstall Bridge, Glossop, and to all the
They left
.mills, and make them turn out.
the market-place. Leach spoke: the substance
of what he said was to recommend the peopleto
remain out till the Charter became the law of the
land. He also advised them to be verx quiet

and not tv molest the property of their masters.
Was there a meeting on Thursday the 11th, at
Hyde? There was a meeting before that on
Wednesday evening. Were you present at that ?
I was, sir. Who else was present ? Leach,
Candelet, and Mr. Crossley, a draper. Have you
notes of what passed at that meeting? Yes,
Leach got on a waggon, and said, he had attended
a meeting of shopkeepers, at the Mechanics'
Institution, and the shopkeepers had come to the
resolution, or determination, I dont know which,
that they would keep the turn-outs for two
weeks. He requested that they would not be led
to put any trust in the false shopkeepers. He
wished the people of Hyde to be true one to
another; and on Wednesday next, they would be
met by Mr. O'Connor, at Manchester, and thent
they would come to a resolution what to do.
He cautioned the people to be honest; not to
take any thing but their own; not to assault
any person, or take any property. Have you any
thing more that he said ? No; Candelet followed
in nearly the same strain of language. Were
you at the meeting on the following day-Thursday, the 11th of August ? No, I was not. What
state was Hyde in at that time ? It was in a
riotous state during that day, and all that week.
Were the mills at work that day ? No, sir.
Was any party at work ? Labour was completely stopped. Did you see any number of
persons leaving Hyde that day ?-Did you see
a large number of persons coming to Hyde that
day ?-Was there a very large number of persons
in Hyde that day ? Witness:-(After some hesitation) yes, they came in in a sort of broken procession, not regular, with clubs and sticks in
their hands. Did you see what course they took,
or which way they went ? They went towards
Stockport. At what time of the day did they
leave Hyde? Theyleft Hyde in the morning, arid
another party left it in the evening. There
were two parties, one in the morning and another
in the evening, but that in the morning was the
larger. Were you at any meeting on Friday, the
12th of August? Yes, in the market-place of
Hyde. How many people attended it ? A large
number. Who was present at it? There was a
man called Charles Swindell, a fruit-dealer, Joht
Leach, a man called Booth, who, I was informed,
came from Newton Heath, Joseph Wardlaw, and
George Candelet. Have you notes of the speeches
made on that occasion ? I have sir. Will you read
them. "Swindell rose in the waggon, waved his
silence.' Wardlaw said, they
'hand, and called '

30
were not to come there day by day, talking and
speaking; they wanted to come to the determi-

nation how they were to get bread; and he, for
one, would go to the masters, as he knew they
could not get the Charter at present. He demanded a show of hands for going to work, but

he was hooted and hissed down." Have you
anything more of his ? No. Did any one else
speak on that occasion?

John Leach.

What

did he say? He told them that Rayner, that
had addressed them last night, had been deputed
by the shopkeepers of Ashton to come and try
to get them to go to their work; but he wished
them to be quiet and true to one another, and
to submit to nothing but the people's Charter.
He then made several remarks about a meeting
at Stockport the day before, and said, that he
headed the people up when they went to the
bastile and took their loaves, and blood would
have been shed had he not prevented it. Also
the Mayor of Stockport had shown him a drawer
which had been broken open, and 71. stolen;
but he wished them not to do anything of that
sort.
Mr. POLLOCK :-HIow did he say that? He
,said it in a laughing sort of a way; he said,
"Yesterday, the Mayor of Stockport told me,
and hundreds besides, that there was plenty in
the store-rooms and mills, aftd if they would not
-give it them, take it."
The JUDGE :-Did he say the Mayor told
them that? Yes, my Lord, he said the Mayor

of Stockport told them so the day previous.
The JUDGE :-Leach said that the Mayor
of Stockport told them to take it, and not that
Leach told them to take it ? Yes, my Lord,
but he did not wish the people of Hyde to do
so. Did the Mayor of Stockport say that, or
Leach? Leach, my Lord: he said the Mayor of
Stockport told them so; but Leach told them to
do as in the time of King John, when Magna
SCharta was granted. That was granted in one
day. The people went in a large body to the
King and demanded it, and it was granted. He
(Leach) told them to be true to one aiother,
and the Charter would be the law of the land.
Samuel Sidebottom, an auctioneer, of Hyde, also
addressed the meeting. He proposed that the
people should go to their masters, and ask for
the wages of 1840. Who spoke next? Booth.
What did he say?

He went on with nearly the

same strain of language is Leach had done. I
did not take it down word for word. Were
there any navigators there? There were many.

The JUDGE :-What are navigators?
Mr. POLLOCK:-People employed on the
Manchester and Sheffield railway. (To the witness) Did Booth say anything to them ? He
said the "navvies" were in great distress, and
they wanted support.
The JUDGE :-The " Navies !" He meant
the navigators were in great distress, I suppose.
He said the " navies," but that is what he
meant, my Lord,-" but they might, if they
choose, do as the Mayor of Stockport said."
The JUDGE :-I thought you did not know
what he said ? This was at the end, my Lord,
when there was a rush of the navigators. " They
might do, if they choose, as the Mayor of Stockport said-that is, go into the stores and help
themselves."
Mr. O'CONNOR:-That is what the Mayor
of Stockport said? [Handing a paper to the
Witness :- Hle (Booth)
Attorney-General.]
said, "as the Mayor of Stockport said." He
(Booth) did not advise so; but when a great
man, like the Mayor of Stockport, advised them
so, "then," said Booth, "you may please your.
selves." Was there any cry among the people
in consequence of that ? Some of the excavators cried out that they would go to the first
shop they met, and help themselves.
The JUDGE:-The excavators are the same
as the navigators ? Yes.
Mr. POLLOCK :- They made a rush towards a shop ? Yes, but one of the excavators
told them to stop; and they did so; and did
not go into the shop. Candelet then began
speaking, but I left to go to the magistrates
office. Were you at the railway at all that day?
I was. Do you remember any person coming
there? Yes. What time of the day? About
eleven o'clock in the morning, but previous to
that I saw a large body of people passing the
magistrates office, coming in a direction towards
the railway. Did you follow these people towards the railway ?-Did you go after them to
the railway ? I went to the Newton Station, and
kept a short cut in company with Mr. Howard,
one of the county magistrates. What day was
that ? On Friday, the 12th of August. What
happened at the railway ? There was a large
number of persons assembled who were conducting themselves riotously. Was there any
cry among them ? O there were different cries
of " Stop them!" I cannot speak to any onb
who was there. A detachment of the Riffe

31
Brigade came. Did the people separate? I left
the company of the magistrate.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, I do not see that
any of the defendants were at that meeting.
Mr. POLLOCK:-I think you were at no
meeting on the 13th ? No. On the 14th were
you at a meeting? I was. Where was that?
It was on Mottram Moor. At what time of
day ? About half-past two o'clock in the afternoon. How many people were there ? It was
not a very large meeting. One, or two hundred?
About two hundred I should think. Whom did
you see at the meeting? Robert Wilde, Cartledge, and a man whose name I understood to
be William Glossop. I am not sure that that
was his name, but I understood so. Did Wilde
speak? He did, sir. What did Wilde say?
Robert Wilde was chairman. What did Wilde
say ? He recommended them to be true to one
another, and the Charter would soon become
the law of the land. You heard another
speaker? Yes. What did he say? He said a
general meeting would take place the following
morning at eight o'clock, when delegates should
be appointed to go to Manchester immediately.
On Tuesday morning, at four o'clock, they would
assemble at Wedensough Green-that is Mottram Moor, and in procession they would proceed to Manchester. Were you at a Meeting
on the 15th? I was, sir. Where was that?
In the market-place, at Hyde. What time of the
day? At eight o'clock in the morning. How
many persons were present ? I have not the
number down, sir, and I do not remember. Can
you speak.to any of the people that were there?
Leach and Boothe were there, and William Muir-.
house was in the chair. Were there any other
speakers there you can speak to ? No. Did
Leach speak? Yes. Have you notes of his
speech? I have. What did Leach say? He
made a long speech about the large sums of
money it took to support the queen, and said,
"Where did that come from, but from the
pockets of the poor ?" and finished, by requesting the people to remain out of work till the
Charter was obtained. Did you attend any
other meetings on the same day-the 15th ?
There was one in the evening at eight o'clock.
Can you speak to any one as being present
there? Yes; Muirhouse and Brooke were there.
Did they speak ? Muirhouse said the meeting
would take place the following morning at six
o'clock, but, at six o'clock, Muirhouse and Boothe
being there, they got on a waggon, and an-

nounced that a meeting would take place the
following morning at six o'clock.
The JUDGE :-One the evening of the 15th.
Muirhouse said there would be a meeting the
next morning at six o'clock ? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Nothing was done at that
meeting, except to appoint a meeting the following day. (To witness)-Did you attend that
meeting ? No, but I ordered my constables to attend. Did you attend any meeting on the 16th ?
I did, sir. Where? At Mottram Moor, at halfpast six in the evening. Was there anything done
at that meeting? Boothe addressed the meeting at
very great length. What did he say?' He had a
large placard in his hand. Was it printed ? It
was. Did you see what was.written upon it? I
could not see to read it. What size was it? Something about the size of this sheet of brown paper,
(exhibiting a sheet of paper.)
The JUDGE:-About three feet long ?
Yes, my lord; about two feet nine inches, or

three feet long, by fifteen or sixteen inches broad.
Boothe took it and held it up before him, and commenced reading it. Did you hear what was read ?
Yes; it began by stating what a large expense her
Majesty was to poor people. What a large quantity of wines she drunk; what a large quantity of
spirits she drunk; and what a number of fat oxen
she eatMr. MURPHY :-Was he reading from the
placard ? Yes,
Mr. DUNDAS :-Are you reading now from
your notes, or speaking from memory ? I am
speaking from memory.
Mr. DUNDAS:-You ought to tell us then,
that we may know the difference.
Mr. MURPHY :-Well, my lord, if that be so,
he ought to produce the placard, and let it speak
for itself.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I do not
know that there was any placard.
The WITNESS proceeded:-The large numher of sheep and lambs she eat, and said she cost
the poor people yearly about 60,0001.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Did any one else speak?
At that time Mr. Sidebottom, one of the county
magistrates, came up in his gig, and sent for me.
I then left the meeting. A cry was then raised
that the magistrates were going to take them, and
.Muirhouse and others leaped out of the cart.
Muirhouse then said, " A meeting will take place
to-morrow morning, at six o'clock." Did you
attend a meeting on the 17th ? I did. Where was
it ? At the market-place at Hyde. At what time ?
At eight o'clock in the morning. Who else was
present? A man who sid he was a delegate from
Manchester. Muirhouse was the chairman; Cardeict was there. Mention the names of those

32
deyou know who werethere? Johnitieach, Boothe, said offenders, we do hereby promise and disthat any person or persons be shall
a man named Barlow, who is not indicted. He is clare, and apprehend, or cause to whodiscovered
cover
a factory operative. What was first done a this and apprehended, the authors, abettors, or permeeting ? An excavator got ori to a waggon, and petrators of any of the outragesabove-mentioned,
said minutes them all to turn out, and that in so that they, or any of them, may be duly conive he wishedall the "navvies" would be out. victed thereof, shall be entitled to the sum of
hfive
minutes all the navvies woldbe out. fifty pounds for each and every person who shall
The excavators had gone to work that morning, be so convicted, and shall also receive our most
my lord. Who spoke next ? A man who said'he gracious pardon for the said offence, in case the
such discovery as aforesaid shall
was a delegate from Manchester. What did that person making prosecuted for the same.
be liable to be
" Given at our Court at Windsor, this 13th day
man say ? He said he was sent from that place to
inform the people of Hyde, that hewas in attend- of August, in the year of ourLord, 1842.
"God savethe Queen."
ance at the Hall as a delegate. Of the delegates
Mr. POLLOCK:-Now we will go to Candeassembled, 340 were for the Charter, and 18
against it. The latter were for the wages of1840, let's speech.-What did he say ? He began by
pointing towards
or for a scale of wages; but the middle classes, reading the proclamation and
classes of people in Manchester, it: it was on the walls.
and all other
The JUDGE :-This was on Wednesday,
were for the Charter, "except the men of steel"'
-the steel-hearted manufacturers. Did Can- the 17th ? Yes, my Lord. He said he did not
delet speak ? He did. Had there been a procla- care a straw for the proclamation as those
mation posted on the walls at that time? There meetings were legal, and held in the day-time to
was. Who did it come from-was it a proclama- protect the interest of the poor. The special
tion from the Queen? It was, sir. What was it constables and soldiers would be of no use; the
bayonets, in eight days time,would be ofnouse;
about ? I left the copy I had at Chester.
Mr. MURPHY :-Would not the proclama- delegates were going about in agricultural distion speak for itself ? If I saw a copy of it I would tricts,warning and turning the labourers out
know it. (A paper was then handed to witness except the millers andthe reapers of grain ; but
by Mr. Gregory). No, that is not it; that is the in fact, they were all nearly out. Then (he
earyanthene
therell
magistrates' proclamation. (Another paper wasin
handed to witness, who examined itcarefully). It askd) where will the military and the special
Manchester
was one similar to this. I believe this is a copy of constables be ? But as I am tobe in
it. It was the Queen's proclamation, dated the at 10 o'clock this morning, I must conclude
13th of August, 1842, and offering a reward of by telling you that, when in the Hall [of science]
last night at 6 o'clock, Mr. Biswick, the superin501. for the conviction of offenders.
The proclamation, of which the following is a tende nt of police, entered and told the people
that he was sent by the Magistrates to inform
copy, was then put in :" BY THE QUEEN"

the people there assembled, that they were not

A PROCLAMATION.

allowed to hold their meetings any longer, while

VIcTORIA R.

the town was in that disturbed state; that three

"Whereas,in divers parts of Great Britain,great magistrates then entered, and gave the people
multitudes of lawless and disorderly persons have ten mites to disperse; but in five minutes
utes to disperse; but in five minutes
'lately assembled themselves together in a riotous
and tumultuous manner, and have, with force they were all gone. The battle is part won; and
and violence, entered into certain mines, mills, be true to one another, and never submit to go
and manufactories, and other places, and have by
threats and intimidation, prevented our gool to work until we have all the points of the
subjects therein employed from following their Charter. Is that all you have of that s]eech ?
Yes, Sir. Did John Leach speak? Yes; he said
usual occupations and earning their livelihood.
"We, therefore, being duly sensible of the Yea, Sir
mischievous consequences which must inevitably he was appointed one of the great national conensue, as well to the peace of the kingdom, as fe'rence, and, at 11 o'clock, he had to meet
to-thelives and properties of our subjects, from
cDoall, for he had sent himword thathe
such wicked and illegal practices, if they go un- McDoual, for he had sent him word that he
punished, and being firmly resolved to cause the' longed to see him. "I will collar him," said
laws to be put in execution for the punishment ofI Leach, and bring him here with me to Hydethis
e
o
t
i
such offenders, have thought fit, by the advice ofad
'ur privy council to issue this proclamation;' evening, and in 8 days' time will be a fixedwage
hereby strictly commanding all justices of the by ct of parliament, and the Charter will be the
peace, sheriffs, under-sheriffs, and all other civi law of the lad
Isthata that passed at that
officers whatsoever, within the said unitedking- law of e land." Is that althat passed at that
dom, that they do use their utmost endeavour to meeting ? He -nade- some observations about the
discover, apprehend, and bring to justice the shopkeepers 'of 11yde. He said they -were a
persons concerned in the riotous proceeding ,,hypocritical set. .Did you hear ef any adjourneftat
above-mentioned.h
the
Whatvas exta.eet"And, as a further inducemeit to disover-the ientOf tatmeeting ?-A

33
ing that you attended on the 18th,the follow- low ? I don't. Don't you know that they
ing day ? I did not attend that in the morning, had been growing lower at the time? No. You
sir. Did you attend any meeting on the 18th? don't know anything about-it one way or the
I attended one in the market-place at Hyde, at other, I suppose? No.
Re-examined by Mr. POLLOCK. Do you rehalf-past seven in the evening. Who was the
chairman? Muirhouse. Was Leach there? He member a large placard headed" the Executive" ?
was, sir. Was any one else there? There was a I do, sir. Do you remember when that was posted
man from Glossop, who, I believe, was called in Hyde? Yes. I ordered one of my men to pull
Robert Wilde. Have you any notes of what he it down, but am not aware of the day. State to
said? I have of what Leach said. What did he between a day or two of it ? It was between the
say ? He began railing against the shopkeepers, 14th and 19th of August. [The placard is handed
and middle-class people. You say there was a to w*itness and he examines it.] Was that exman there from Glossop ? Yes, sir. Had he tensively posted about Hyde ? Not extensively.
spoken before Leach ? It was a delegate that Did you see half a dozen? I did not see many
spoke before Leach. What did he say? I did of them. Did it excite much attention there ?
not take notes, and I do not know anything about I .saw very many people reading it.
The JUDGE :-You saw very few copies
him. You said a man came there and said he
was a delegate from Glossop? Yes. Did he of the placard, but very many people reading
say he was a delegate? No. Did Leach say them ? Very few, my Lord.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS. You were
anything in his speech about this man from
Glossop ? Leach began by saying, how much asked if you had seen half a dozen of copies,
money he had expended on account of the spin- now, upon your good faith, did you see more
ner's union in Glasgow, Paisley, &c., and com- than one? I do not think I did. Now, did you
plained that one penny had not been spent for read it so as to be able to say that is a copy of
the Charter. Go on. " Does not," said he, " my it ? I did not say that that was a copy of it; I
friend from Glasgow tell you that there is plenty said it was similar. Well, what is it ? I did not
of able-bodied men in Glossop-dale, well armed read this, sir; if you allow me to read it I will
with their bludgeons, and not frightened to use be able to tell you whether it is like the other
them ? Where will all the specials and red-coated or not. [Witness reads a portion of the plagentry be then ? Glad. to give in, and we will card.] I have not read it all, but I believe that
have them to-morrow in large numbers, to meet is a copy of it. Well, do you undertake to
and go to Ashton." Have you any more of his swear that that is a copy of the one that was
speech ? He strongly recommended the people on the wall? To the best of niy belief it is a
to be firm, and as long as he lived he would copy; it may be a word wrong; or two or
agitate, for the aristodracy of this country were three lines wrong. It may be ten lines wrong ?
bad, and without alteration would soon be worse. It may. Then do you undertake to say, that it
Did you hear any notice given of when they may be more than -ten lines wrong? Yes, or it
would meet again? There were notices given may be less. Then do I understand you to say,
that a meeting would take place the following that, notwithstanding there may be a wide difmorning at 9 o'clock. Did you attend the fol- ference between that placard and the one on
lowing morning? I did not, sir. During all the the wall, that such difference is of no consetime you have been speaking of, were the mills quence? The heading, and the last sentence are
at Hyde and the neighbourhood out of work .? the very same; and, I believe it is the same.
They were, sir. How long did they continue Mr. Constable-Mr. Special High Constable, atout of-work? I do not know exactly the date, tend ! I do not ask you about the heading;
some were out of work longer than others. I ask you about the body of the placard. You
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON. I think have sworn that there minay be ten or twelve
you have been speaking of Hyde and the neigh- lines, and still you say they are similar ? Yes, I
bourhood; now, during thattime was there not say they are similar still.
eonsiderable distress among the manufacturing
Cross-examination by Mr. ATHERTON reopratives, and* the labourers ? I am aoet.,ware sumed. Let us understand what you are: are
of any. Are you not aware that wages mwese youa speiil constable, or a high-constable? I am
vety low at that time-? No. Doesst you 'kaws Spec6ic ltgh:constable. Well, that is a prominent
that at that time the wages of w*tme 'wer post.-You are-not napecial constablein the com-

34
mon sense of the term; it is your trade-your
occupation ? Yes. I think you said you were in
the habit of taking notes of what went on day
by day ? Yes.
Mr. DUNDAS :--Let me look at your book ?
[Witness hands the book to Mr. Dundas.]
Mr. ATHERTON :- And for that purpose
you took notes ? Yes. To lay them before the
magistrates from day to day ? Yes. Did you
do so? Undoubtedly. Two or three times a
day if required; and I gave explanations, if the
magistrates required any, from my notes. And
you did that from day to day, as these things

book when examined before the magistrates?
No, sir, because there was no evidence against
any one. Was the evidence against Muirhouse
different from that in the book ?- It was in
that book you got the evidence against Muirhouse? Yes, and on this piece of paper. (Exhibiting some paper to the Court.]
The JUDGE:---That is the book from which
yonu are now speaking ?Yes.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I thought you handed me
back the book. Witness:-It was another book
I handed you. Mr. O'Connor :-Did you produce this book when examined before the magis-

Yes up
took place took place? to the present day
Yes, up to the present day.

trates, in open court, when Muirhouse was

Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Now,
Little, you appear to be a conscientious witness.
You would not swear from recollection when
you had your notes, to anything? No. You
preferred swearing from your notes; now, this
book is not a transcript from notes-this is the
original ? Yes. Did you take any notes but
what you transcribed into this book? I am not
aware that I dkd. Cannot you recollect whether
you did or not ?-Were all these transactions
written on the day they occurred, or as nearly
as possible afterwards ? Yes. Were you examined before the magistrates ? I was, many a

charged? I did not. You could not give evidence here, except your memory was refreshed
from this book? No, sir. Did you not swear
that it was your duty to take notes daily for the
purpose of submitting it to the magistrates ?
Yes. And could you think of a more fitting and
proper opportunity for exhibiting this book than
when this man was examined ? I cai explain the
reason why I did not produce the book.
The JUDGE :-Explain it.
On apprehending the prisoners,we were obliged
to take them away to Stockport. We could not
keep them in Hyde, as we had no military, and
as our police force was too weak, and therefore

them to
time. Were you examined when Leach was ! we conveyed over and Stockport, and the magis
committed them. I went
trates came
arraigned before the magistrates ? Leach never with the
was brought before the magistrates; he ab- memory. Mr. O'Connor :-Were you examined
sconded. Was Candelet brought before the after they were committed ?-I beg your pardon,
magistrates ? No. Was Muirhouse brought you were speaking of Muirhouse; was there any
before the magistrates ? He was. When ? If other person against whom you gave evidence ?
you allow me the book, I will tell you, sir. Well, I swore against about twenty. Well, was any of
it is at the end of the book; that will do as well these persons remanded? They were committed.
as if you told me. It is the last transaction in And you did not present that book? No. Now,
on the
the book. Well, I don't know till I look, sir. the first transaction you speak of, was
and he morning of the 7th? Yes. Was that a violent
[Mr. O'Connor hands witness the book,
were bound to collect every
looks at it for sometime.] I believe it was meeting? No. You
magistrates ; and for that purpose
you take it
August. Did n ow mae thing for the the first meeting, which
the tht o
Friday, froy 26th of Ys. W
you attended
took place
from that book ? Yes. Well then, show me on the morning of the 7th, and yet you left that
that book? [Witness hands the book to Mr. meeting after Leach had spoken, and you do not
O'Connor.] Now, sir, give me leave to ask you, know anything more that occurred ? O, I redid any of your evidence go to charge him when turned! The reason I left was, a number of peoswearing against him ? I am not aware. You pie were going into a public house, and I went to
do not remember that? I am not aware. Now, turn them out. That is the reason I left. Now,
then, it was about the 26th you say you were you told us that on the 9th, a large number of
people came into Hyde to stop Horsefield's
sworn?
mills? I did not swear on the 9th: I said on the
he JUDGE :-About the 26th.
not you swear that they
Mr. O'CONNOR:--About the 26th, my Lord. 8th or 9th. But did
and did not you know
to stop his
This book brings your transac- cameBayley's mills mills; the first from which the
(To Witness)
were
that
to the meetings that hands turned out? No. Did you hear anything
tions down to the 18thLeach attended ? To Saturday, the 20th, sir. about the distress that existed? No. It is your
Saturday, the 20th ?- Did you produce this duty to collect information for the magistrates?

35
It is in my division. And yet you never heard
a word about the distress ? No. Not a word ?
No, I won't swear "not a word," sir. Well,
what did you hear ? I did not hear any unusual
expressions about distress. I heard Leach
saying that the shopkeepers had come to
a resolution to support the turn-outs for a fortnight, but he advised them not to be led by
the shopkeepers. Now, I think, that in speaking'
of the 10th, you said the disturbances were great
about Hyde ? Yes. From the 11th they were
great? They commenced on Monday, the 8th.
For a week they were great ? For a week or more.
When did they cease ?-When did the public
mind appear to sober down a little ? After Saturday, the 20th. When Leach left the town,
we never had any disturbance. When did you
see this placard? Which placard ? That placard
you have been questioned respecting-as to its
body, head, and tail? From the 14th to the 19th.
What was the first day you saw it ? That is the
nearest I can come to it. "ave you made no
note of it ? No, sir. You have of all the morning ahd evening meetings, and none of that ?
The reason is, I took the placard down and delivered it to the magistrates, after putting my
name on it. I expected to see it here, and that
I could identify it by the writing on the back of
it: but it is not here. After the 20th, all turbulence ceased ? Yes. Did the men begin to return
to their work about that time? They did, sir, in
some parts of my division. Did those who had
turned out go in gradually from the 20th to the
present time? They did. Now, you say that on
the 17th, Leach said he was going to meet
McDouall ? He did; but I won't swear to the
date without the book. You have swornThe JUDGE :-He says he won't swear to the
date without the book-but (to the witness) it is
the date you have already mentioned.
What day was it that Leach said he was going
to Manchester to meet McDouall, to collar him,
and bring him to Hyde if possible? On Wednesday, the 17th. On Wednesday, the 17th, he
Yes.
was going as a delegate to Manchester? 18th,
the
Then you have sworn as to ameeting on
when Leach returned? I have, sir. Did Leach
say anything about the delegates' meeting he attended? You have not told us anything about
that yet.
The JUDGE :-Did Leach say anything about
wvhat ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-As to the delegate meeting he was sent to Manchester to attend. Witness:-I don't remember. He said nothing; he
spoke about the distress of the country, and not

that 340 were for the Charter, and 18 for the
wages of 1840.-Is that what you said ? Yes.
That was said at the trades' meeting, was it not ?
Was it not at the trades' delegates' meeting that
that was said ?-Answer me.-You know that
Did you make
340 and 18 do not make 40!any correction, alteration, or interlineation in
this book since you wrote it outfrom memory ?
I might, since I was called before the magistrates.
Now look at the interlineation there, and see
if it is in the same ink. [Mr. O'Connor hands
the book to witness.] When was that interlineation written ? I believe on Monday morning, the 8th. I drew my blotting paper over
it. On Sunday night I put that down [pointing to the original writing]; and on Monday
morning I put that [the interlineation] down.
before the magistrates, on these topics ? I was.
Were you examined since you were examined at
Chester? I have not been examined by any one.
Was that book out of your possession since?
No, with the exception of a short time. Now,
sir, how was it necessary that counsel should
force it out of you that Leach said "with a
laugh," what he did say about the Mayor of
Stockport ? He had it that way. The question
is, how did counsel for the prosecution know
how to put it to you? I gave that evidence

before at the special commission at Chester, and
i
s stnaHestr
before am
it was from that it was taken. He took it from
the depositions, no doubt. Hand me the book.
[Witness hands the book to Mr. O'Connor.]
Now, sir, I ask you again, upon your oath, were
the several transactions written in this book on
the day on which they occurred; or, at the
farthest, on the morning after? They were, sir.
Did you make any alteration in your notes since
you were before the magistrates ? Yes, I might
have made some. And all about the Charter?
Well, shew us what you did make.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-There is a
not left out in one place. Don't let it be said
that wholesale alterations have been made.
The JUDGE, having received the book, ohserved-On the 8th of August, there's an interlineation about the Charter.
Mr.O'CONNOR :-When he was going before
the magistrates, my Lord, which was on the 8th
of August.
The JUDGE :-Yes, that was the 8th.
WITNESS:-There is an alteration on Tuesday, the 9th of August.

Mr. O'CONNOR :-Read it, and read how it
a word of that. Now I think you have spoken of
another delegate, saying, at a delegates' meeting, stood first in the text, and then read the altera-

36
tions. Witness then read the following extract:
" Tuesday, the 9th of August.-Muirhouse and
Leach were the speakers, and Candelet. At a
quarter to seven, A. M. the meeting broke up,
part of the people going to Manchester, and part
to Ashton, and part to Stockport."
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now, out with the alterations, Witness :-" They advised the people to
remain out of work." Now, I put that in but
it does not apply to anything.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-,-Why it applies to every
thing. Now, Mr. Special High County Constable for Hyde. Witness :- For the Hyde
division, sir. Did Leach live at Hyde ? Yes.
I belieye he took a prominent part in all discussions in Hyde ?
The JUDGE :-John Leach? Is that so ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes, my lord.
WITNESS:-I am not aware that he did.
Was he not always opposed to the Anti-corn-law
League? Don't you understand that? I don't
remember him to say anything about it. Don't
you remember him to be a staunch opponent of
the Anti-corn-law League ? Ido not, Now, how
does it happen that in your ledger, except in one
or two cases, you have got all that Leach said,
but nothing of what more than one or two more
said? Because I knew more of him. He was
your townsman, and therefore you reported him
at length in reference to the Charter, and passed
over the others with a comment. I have no
more to ask this witness., my lord.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My lord, I wish to have a,
opportunity of looking at this book.
The JUDGE:-Are there any other defendants that wish to ask him any questions ?
Cross-examined by GEORGE JOHNSON,
oneof the defendants :-Yonqrecollect heing called
up to depose against some of the Duckinfield
people, in the Court-house of Ashton ? I do.
You gave the same account at that time ? I did.
Did you produce that book then? No, I had not
the book. I was called on by the magistrates to
depose, but I did not. Did not you swear, when
myself and some more were examinedi as to what
you heard at the Wedensough meeting ? I was
brought before the magistrates) andl said I could
not swear without my notes, and therefore no
evidence was taken down against them. Will
you swear that you never mentioned the Wedensough meeting before the magistrates ? I did
mention that meeting. I was asked if 1.had been
at the Wedensough-green meeting, andl I said I
was. But you did not depose to anything? No.
Well, I don't wish to hurt your feelings, but just
recollect yourself ? Yes, I was brought to the
Town-hall, and swore at the Town-hall respecting the meeting at Mottram Moor.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL -Was your
examination taken in writing? No.
GEORGE JOHNSON :- ow long have you
been in Hyde? About 18 months. Did you not
hear of people working short time ?-I suppose
your vocation brings you into the houses of the
poor ? Not often. Are you aware that there has
been a great increase of distress on the people?
I don't know .- My Lord, I have nothing to do
with making distress. Have you any knowledge as to the number of applicants to the poor
law guardians ? The poor law guardian meetings
are not at HydeThey are at Stockport. Well,
you swore that you have no knowledge of the
increase of applications to the poor law guardians
during that 18 months? In fact I know nothing
of what you are asking me. The guardians of
the poor meet in Stockport, which is out of my
-division.
Cross-examinedlb the defendant PILLING
Are younot aware that I stopped a mill at Hyde ?
No. Has there not been charity subscriptions
for the poor of Hyde? [No answer] Has there
not been coupling of jennies ? I dont understand
what you mean. Do you know of spinners' spinning with 3 deckers.?-Do you know what it is
for one man to dothree men's work? No, I never
was three times in a factory in my life.
The JUDGE :-He tells you he does not
know.
RICHARD PILLING:-He has no notion of
what he should know (laughter).
Mr DUNDAS :--There are five or six alterar
tions in this book, my Lord, and I shall take
them in order. The first alteration is-" They
also make allusion to the Charter."
The JUDGE :- When is that?

Mr. DUNDAS:-On the 8th of August.
The JUDGE:-Candelet says, "My friends and
fellow workmen, it is a wage question"-where
does that [interlineation] come in?I
Mr. DUNDAS :-It is further down, my Lord,
and in.John Leach's speech-No, my Lord, it
must be in Muirhouse's speech-" He began by
making some observations about the church,
and the people that attended it."
The JUDGE :-He has not said a word of
that here. I want to know if any alteration is
made that I can see here.
Mr. DUNDAS :-There's an interlineation
here on an important point, and I want him to
tell us whether it is an alteration made in a reasonable manner? Witness :-That was made the
next morning.

Mr. DUNDAS:-But the alteaion made is "Tuesday, August 9th, 4 A.M., large meeting
commenced 5;o'clock A.m. ; speakers, Muirin allusion to the Charter.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord, I house, Leach, and Candelet." And then you
won't object to it, if your Lordship thinks I ought put in thi:-"-- They advised the people to renot. Your Lordship sees they have got a main out of work," as I read it; but you will
memorandum made in some part as to which read your own writing better than Ido. "They
the witness has not been examined, and which advised the people to remain out of work.'"
has not been givyn in evidence.
Why did you introduce that? and when did you
The JUDGE :-But if they find any part introduce it ?---You say it is not material, but
fraudulently altered it might go far to impugn that is a question.
the general accuracy of the whole.
The JUDGE :-What he has stated is exactly
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:-Then, my the same thing. It is as if it were a marginal note.
Mr.DUNDAS :-Yes, but it is a marginal note
Lord, the book is in evidence and is before the
; and
j.ury it is no longer a private memorandum. introduced afterwards.
The JUDGE :-[To Witness] Is that so
not
For when the book is taken and looked at,
as, to that part on which evidence has been Witness:-Yes, my Lord.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Well, you will not tell me
given, but to other parts not read, then it ceases
to be a private memorandum book, and the jury when that note was made? Witness -No.
must see the whole of it.
Well, we will go on. Here is another. Was
Mr. DUNDAS:- My Lord, it is not at all that alteration made at the time you wrote the
necessary that you should be bound to make it note or afterwards; say at what day of the
evidence.
month ? This is a copy of the report given me
The JUDGE :-I shall notgive anyprospective by one of the men, but it is not given in evidecision; as questions arise, I shall decide them. dence, because I did not go to these meetings
Mr.DUNDAS :-Then he says that, on a Mon- myself, but sent a constable, and I copied his
day, he introduced that interlineation,
report in my handwriting.
The JUDGE:-That is discussing about
Mr. DUNDAS :-I confess his account of
nothing, for the whole of what follows is all what was in the book led me to suppose that
about the Charter, and it is only putting at the whatever he wrote in that book was either taken
top-ofit a little of what the whole book wasfull down the day the transaction occurred, or imof:before and after.
mediately afterwards.
The JUDGE :-Yes, every thing which reMr. DUNDAS :-Then, on the 9th of August.
Would: you be good enough to look, and you ferred to the transactions of which he is giving
will find an interlineation thera "It is good evidence, but there are things in that book which
stuff-it is very good stuff-they advise the gives an account of meetings that he did not
people to remain out of work." (To Witness) attend.
Now, would you look at that if your please; it
Mr. DUNDAS :-Now, here is some evidence
is on the 9th of August; now tell us when that about Magna Charta. How comes this loose
interlineation was made? I do not remember leaf:? Witness :-It has come out, but you will
what that alludes to. When did you make that find that it is the same in every respect as the
alteration,? Will you swear it was written others.
at the same time as the rest? I do not know.
Mr. DUNDAS:-My Lord, on Friday; the
Then, how long after the rest? Willyou swear 12th of August, you will find that part of the
that what you wrote down there was either on. evidence about Magna Charta: "He did not
the same day the rest was written, or as shortly wish the people of Hyde to do so, but to do as
after as possible ?- Ih what time was itwrote ? was done in the time of King John, when
Witness:-I do not know;- I have not given it Magna Charta was granted. The people went
in evidence. During the riots I did not leave in a large body to the King and demanded it,
home, but now I am in Lanoaster, and I cannot aud it wasgranted." Then comes the interlienter anything in my book till I go home. When neation :-" He told them to be true to one anowas that alteration made? It is not made for ther, and ihe Charter would be the law of the
an alteration; the book is not altered in any land." These words are an interlineation, and
respect, or shape. Then let me see. Take the are in avidence. Now, sir, tell me whether
these worls,abot whiOh, there can. be no misboek What yo originally wrote is-thisa-,
*

38
take, were put down originally, when you put
down the rest? When I came to examine all
the speeches over singly, one by one, before I
reported them to the magistrates, I added that
to it. When ? Before I reported to the ma.
gistrates. Did you write it with the same pen ?
I do not remember. You will swear that? 1
did it before I read the note over to the magistrates. Then here is, on Monday, August the
15th, another interlineation.
The JUDGE :-When was that made ?
Mr. DUNDAS:-It is that evidence where
Leach made a speech about the expenses of the
Queen. " And where did that money come from ?
It came from the pockets of the poor." This
was on Monday, August the 15th. It is in the
very beginning of the book, my lord. The very
third line. [To the witness]-I understood you
to say, that you compared this with your notes as
soon as you corrected it? When I got back from
the meeting to the office, which is a short distance, I wrote the speeches down as nearly as I
could think. Did you write them in that book ?
Yes. You have no other papers of that transaction ? Yes, two at Wedensough Green. But
of that transaction have you any notes? Not
here, sir. Have you any notes of it? No. Then
what did you mean by saying "Not here ?" Because you have one down there, sir.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Yes, you
have some of the notes down here.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Then what you read from
that book, was made from what you had in your
own mind, and not from any notes you had ? Yes.
Then look in the 15th of August, and tell me
whether that about the " pockets of the poor"
was written down at the same time with any of the
rest? I wrote it in Hibbert's office. I told the
magistrates what I had heard, and afterwards
wrote it down.
Mr. DUNDAS :-That is the account of that
on the 15th of August. Well, then I will take
you to another which you wrote the following
day. Now, my lord, on the 17th of August, on
Wednesday, in giving an account of what was
said, we have this interlineation : " The battle is
your own, and never submit till you have all
points of the Charter."

Now tell me when that

was written? That was written in the same manner as the other, when I was called before the
magistrates; and being asked did I hear anything of the sort, I said I did, and wrote it down.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Then I am to understand
that the words-" The battle is your own, and
never submit till you have all points of the Charter," was asked you by the magistrates? Yes.
How soon, then, after you entered the rest, was

it that you entered this particular marginal note
here ? I believe it was the day after-yes, I beit was.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-When did
your duty commence? It is stated in that book;
on Wedriesday, the 3rd of November. Now,
that is the first book you had after you were
appointed at Hyde? It is a report of duty commencing Nov. 2nd, 1841. Now, does not this
contain the entry of your duty from that day forward down to the end of it? It does, sir. Regularly, day by day, during the year 1841 ? Yes,
sir. And then going to 1812, down to this period
in August, and since ? Yes, sir. Now give me
that book [witness hands it to the AttorneyGeneral].-Now are these two books all the
books you have kept since you have been on duty
in Hyde ? Yes, sir. These are all the books you
have had during the whole time? Yes, for that
purpose. For that purpose ? Yes. I understood
you to state that you never made any other notes,
except what are here-except that paper about
the meeting at Wedensough Green. Where is
that paper ? It is down there. Well, let us see
that we do not lose it. [This paper was missing,
and after considerable searching it was found
under one of the defendants]. Now,that is the memorandum relating to the Wedensough Meeting?
This is Muirhouse's speech, which I took down
in that way. Why did you take it down in that
way, and not put it in the book ? I had not the
book there, sir. Did you shew this book to the
magistrates, and give them such explanations
from it as they required ? Yes, sir. Will you
undertake to swear, that from day to day, as you
made the entries in this book, the magistrates
were in the habit of seing it ?-When you made
he report, did you refer to the book ? Yes, sir.
Now, on some occasions, you say, that on going
before the magistrates you made some alterations ? Yes. Several of the alterations made did
not refer to the evidence given to-day ? No.
You think the explanations you have given
about these alterations true ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-Are you able to say that the
alterations were made when your recollection
enabled you to say that they were perfectly conformable to truth ? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-On looking over the book,
my Lord, I do not perceive that there is one
single interlineation in all the other parts of the
book, down to the time to which his- evidence
relates. Here is an alteration made in 1841,
and, for aught I know, it may be a very important alteration, " Thomas . Hammond" is
struck out and" Edward Hammond" is put in.

39
THOMAS BEATTlE having been called,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
am requested by the defendants not to go further in tbis case to-night.
The JUDGE :-Well, I believe there are
jurymen in attendance, and if so, we may take
another case. [It was then intimated that
were no common jurors present.] Well, I will
do. it as fat5 as I can, but I must not run the risk

there

END

OF FIRST

of being unable to get through the busines.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Perhaps it
will not occur again, my Lord; the suggestion
relates only to to-day.
The jury also having expressed a wish to ad.
journ, his Lurdship assented, intimiating that he
would sit late the following day.
The Court rose at half-past five o'clock.

DAY

6

TRIAL

TRIAL OF FEARGUS O'CONNOR, ESQ.,
AND OTHERS.

SECOND

DAY,

Thursday, .41arch 2nd, 1843.

Mr. BARON ROLFE took his seat on the bench precisely at nine o'clock, at
which hour the Court was as densely crowded as on the preceding day. Among
those present, we observed the Right Honourable Sir James Graham, Secretary of
State for the Home Department, James Kershaw, Esq., Mayor of Manchester,
Mr. Alderman Royle Chappell, of Manchester, Elkanah Armitage, Esq., borough
Magistrate of Manchester, Alderman Sir Thomas Potter, of Manchester, and several
other Aldermen and manufacturers from that locality, all of whom had been subp(enaed by Mr. O'Connor to give eidenee respecting the late outbrea.
Alderman
Brooks, of Anti-Corn Law League notoriety, had also been summoned by Mr.
O'Connor; the man who, at the Anti-Corn Law League rooms, in July, 1842,
moved the notorious resolution predicting the outbreak, and calling on the people to
impede the wheels of Government, found it more convenient to be sick on this occasion, and accordingly, a professional gentleman was in attendance with an unauthenticated physician's letter o claim an exemption for him, if called. In consequence, however, of Mr. O'Connor's having changed the line of his defence, Mr.
John Brooks was spared an examination, which, doubtless, would have gone far
towards developing the secret springs of that movement, " for conspiring to encourage" which, the Chartists had been indicted.
Immediately after his Lordship took his seat,
Mr. O'CONNOR rose and said :-I understand, my Lord, that several witnesses
on both sides have arrived since yesterday, and therefore I beg to repeat my application, that all the witnesses do leave the Court. I see the Right Honourable the
Secretary of State for the Home Department here, and I wish to make an exception
in his favour.
The JUDGE :-Let all the witnesses on both sides leave the Court. Does any
defendant wish Sir James Graham to go out of Court.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I presume not, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The penalty of remaining in Court after being ordered to retire, is the displeasure of your Lordship, and not merely the
penalty of not giving evidence.
The JUDGE :-It is contempt of Court, y-,, know.

41
you know Where they has been taken ?
SADLER :--Examined by 'the 'id
are you? I am a Some were taken in the workhouse, some:outpolice officer of Stockport. Where you there on side in the vicinity of the workhouse, and some
the 11th of August last ? Yes sir. Do you re- in the road leading to it. Did any person, to
member some persons coming into the town of your knowledge, make an application to the auStockport ? I do. About how many ? Between thorities and magistrates about releasing your
prisoners ? Yes. Who ? There were four per20,000 and 30,000.
sons-certainly three, who made an application
The JUDGE :-20,000 or 30,000 people?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Had you the to have an interview with the magistrates. Did
means of judging from what direction they came ? you know any of the persons ? I knew one parThey came from the direction of Ashton and ticularly well. What is his name? John
Hyde. Had they any arms ? They had bludgeons Wright.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-1-e is not in the indictand sticks. Where did you first see any part of
the mob ? Inthe marketu-place. In very great ment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Any body
numbers ? Yes. But where did you first see
them .when you say they were coming from else ? Witness:-One who gave his name as
Ashton and Hyde ? I saw them coming through Leach. Did you see him afterwards? Only
a street called Newbridge Lane. In what man- during the interview with the magistrates. Did
ner were they conducting themselves? When I he state what his name ws beside Leach? I
saw them they were passing through the street. believe, John Leach. Did he say where he
Making a noise? Yes, but nothing else at the came from ? Hyde. Were you present when
time. Did you make any application to the any application was made to the magistrates?
Mr. DUNDAS:--My Lbrd, I object to the
magistrates ? I went to the Court-house where
-the magistrates were then assembled. Did you ansWer to this question. I apprehend the degive any information ? I did, sir. Had you any scription given by the witnes is not sufficient to
military in Stockport? We had, Sir. Where satisfy the court that this is the person on the
were they ? They were assembled partly in the record. He is only spoken of as aperson called
Market-house, partly in the Court-house and Leach. The witness believes the name to be
some in the barracks; some of the yeomanry John Leach. He (the witness) never saw him
were at their quarters. Where did this body of' again, and does not speak to any of the transacpersons from Ashton and Hye eo to? They tions done by this John Leach, of Hyde.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord,
town, to the
went in different directions of ftie
different mills. Did they march peaceably and without discessing the general question, whether
quietly ? Not in all parts. Now, did theirnum- any thing done by a large mobof this description
bars create any alarm ? They did. What was the would not be evidence, I submit that what has
consequence ? All the shops were closed. What been stated, should go before the Jury. Leach
was done at the mills ? The hands were turned was well known in the neighbourhood of
out, and the mills were stopped. Were you present Stockport and Hyde. And I will recall to your
at any of the mills where the bands were turned Lordship's recollUetion the fact that Littleproved
out ? I was not. Where you present when any that John Leach of Hyde stated, that he had
of the mob did any acts of violence of any sort ? been at Stockport; and, I think, he stated that
Yes. Were you present when the mob was at he had had an interview with him, the mayor,
I think that is sufficient
the union workhouse? Yes, I went there with and magistrates.
the civil authorities. What did you find to be evidence to go to a jury, that this individual was
the state of things there ? We found a great John Leach, of Hyde.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, Isubmit that that
number of persons there, coming away from the
workhouse, having a quantity of loaves of bread is no answer at all.
The JUDGE :-What day was this ?
in their possession. Were you at the workhouse
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The 12th of
at the time they got there, or did you only
come up afterwards ? Afterwards. Where vere August.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Yes, my Lord, on Friday the
you ?-Did you go into the workhouse,- or did
you remain outside? I went in with the magis- 12th of August.
He
trates and some part of the military. Had you: The JUDGE :-'" then made some remarks
any prisoners ? Yes, between thirty and forty. About a meeting which took place at Stockport
JOSEPH

.tt orney-general :-What

42
the day before; he headed the people up
where they went to the bastile and took their
loaves."
:
Mr. DUNDAS:-I submit that it is not at
all evidence. It is not sufficient to shew that
wvhat a mob does shall be evidence in such a
case as the present, I object to what an individual says in private to a magistrate, by way of
private application. Here is an application made
by a private individual, belonging to a mob, to a
magistrate about prisoners. Now, until such
time as you have exhausted all the John Leachs
of Hyde, you do not advance one single step--You do not shew that this is the same John Leach
who on a former occasion was at Stockport.
The JUDGE :-I think there is some John
Leach in this indictment, but we are not absolutely certain that he is the same John Leach
who was at Stockport.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-You will bear in mind,
,my Lord, that the witness says, he is not sure
that he would not know him again.
The JUDGE :-There might be a different
objection arising, supposing John Leach was to
stand up and say, " Am I the man?"
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, as there are several counts in this indictment, and these counts
charge all the defendants alike, so that whatever
affects Leach will affect all; therefore, each defendant has a right to object. I object on the
ground that the witness not being able to identify Leach.
The JUDGE :-A person calling himself John
Leach, of Hyde, came up and made a certain
application. Now, what is going to be further
stated I cannot controul.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (To witness):Were you present when an application was
made to the magistrates of Stockport by a
person calling himself John Leach ? Yes. What
passed ?
. Mr. DUNDAS:-Now, I object to answering
the question; and, on the same ground.
The JUDGE :-I shall take a note of the objection.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I submit that
as against John Leach this is evidence. There
is a man whose name and place of abode cor-.
responds with the John Leach on this record.
Now, what did John Leach say? lie said he
had come at the request of a public meeting, on
hehalf of the prisoners then in custody, and requested the magistrates that the prisoners might
be released. Did he give any reason for saying

nothing more about it ? He was informed by
the mayor, that they were in custody on a charge
of felony.
The JUDGE :-He said so.
The ATTORNEY-GENE RAL:-Yes, my Lord,
in answer to a request. Leach was not the only
speaker. Witness :-And that they could only
be discharged by a proper course of law. What
I want to know is, was there anything stated to
the magistrates as a reason why they should let
the-prisoners go ?
Mr. DUNDAS (To witness) :- Who stated
that ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My learned
friend wants to know who stated it. Witness
One of the parties said, if the prisoners were
not released, they were in such a state of excitement, that they (the mob) could not answer
for the consequences. Then the mayor said,
"They must be discharged by due course of
law ?" Yes. And, in point of fact, the prisoners
were not rescued? They were committed. Was
there any meeting that day in Stockport ? There
was a meeting in a space of ground in Stockport, called the Waterloo Road. Is it Waterloo
Road, or Waterloo Ground ? Waterloo Road;
it is an open space adjoining the Highway.
How many persons were present at that meeting? More than 1000. Was there any platfdrm, cart, or waggon, for the speakers to stand
on ? The speakers stood on a wall. Were there
speakers? There were. Did you get near enough
to see them, so as to know them again ? I saw
them in the act of addressing the people. Was
the riot act read? It was. When? Between
one and two o'clock. Where ? In the marketplace. Was that before or or after the attack
upon the workhouse, do you remember ? I do
not very well know. From the 11th was there
any disturbance in Stockport from day to day ?
Yes. For how long? Till the 20th. And how
long after ? For several weeks ; but particularly
for ten or eleven days after, the town was in a
disturbed state.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Particularly till the 20th ?
Yes.
The JUDGE :-The 11th was on Thursday,
and you mean particularly to the end of the following week ? Yes, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - During
that time you have mentioned, were the shops
open? Yes. Did the mills resume any labour ?
No.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Just tell me for my information, how far is Stockport from Manchester ?

43
Seven miles. How far is it from Hyde ? Five
miles.
The JUDGE .- Manchester, Stockport, and
Hyde, seem to form a triangle,
Mr. DUNDAS:-You say the riots and disturbances continued till the 20th, and afterwards? Yesu. Was the riot act ever read again
after the 11th ? I believe not. You should have
known if it had been ? Yes, sir. Very well.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Before I ask this witness any questions, my Lord, I
should wish that he was retained, because it may
be necessary to examine him afterwards.
The JUDGE:-By all means. [To the witness.] You are not to leave the town.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes.
The JUDGE :-[Towitness.) Well, you will
mind that.
WITNESS:-My Lord, it will be a great inconvenience to me if I am detained.
The JUDGE:-I cannot help that.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-How long have you filled
that office you hold at present ?-As head of the
police? Seven years. I have been in the police
more than 11 years. Do you recollect the riots of
1839 ? Yes. Were they as bad as the last riots,
or worse ? So far as Stockport was concerned,
there was not so much alarm. At the time of
the second holiday ? Yes. Do you know a man
of the. name of Wm. Griffin ? Yes. Do you
know him well? I knew nothing of him till that
to report in the
when
occasion What he came mean by reporteing Police
Court.
do you
He
to report for the Northern Star. I
came there
think you said when you came to the workhouse,
you saw a mob coming away with bread ? Yes.
The Mayor of Stockport said, that the prisoners
must be discharged in due course of law ? Yes.
Had you heard any exciting language used by
other parties in Stockport, not connected with
those parties that went into the workhouse? In
the workhouse, sir. At any time previous to this
outbreak, had you? I attended several meetings
by the direction of the magistrates, and am not
aware that I heard exciting language at any of
the meetings.
The JUDGE :-The question is, had you previously to this occasion-the attack on the workhouse-heard any exciting language ? No.
Mr O'CONNOR:-Did you hear this language
used by any of the speakers; "That he could
not be responsible for a breach of the peace; I do
not meantothreaten outbreaks-that the starving
masses will come and pull down your mansions
massesand pull down your mansions
ill come
-but I say that you are drifting on to confusion
without rudder or compass. It is my firm belief,

lation; you may talk of repressing the people by
the military, but what military force would be
equal to such an emergency ? The military will
not avail. I do not believe that the people will
break out unless they are absolutely deprived of
food. If you are not prepared with a remedy, they
will be justified in taking food for themselves
and their families."-Did you see that? Iam not
aware. Did you see it on a placard on the wall?
I am not sure. Did you see it handed about in
fly sheets among the people? I believe I have.
The JUDGE :-Do you remember when that
was circulated ? My Lord, I would not swear
with certainty as to the time I saw it, but I believe I saw it.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Do you not think that, if
that Hy
it must have beenthesai10th of Aude,
gust, at Hyde, it must have been said before the
If that was read by a previ12th of Augustous speaker on the 10ih, does it not show that it
was printed before that period ?-Who was it attributed to ?
The JUDGE :-I must take a note of what
that paper contains. I have only got-" I saw
a paper containing"-I could not follow what
you said.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The question
put by Mr. O'Connor this moment was, Who
was that attributed to
The JUDGE :-I have not arrived at that yet.
It is necessary to take the substance of what
that paper contains. It will makenonsense of my
note to omit it.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I may state to your Lordship that it was a speech delivered byThe JUDGE :-I would rather take a note of
what the paper contains. It was a paper containing a writing
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Iwill only give your Lord" I don't believe that the
ship three linesple will break out unless they are absolutely
people will break out unless they are absolutely
deprived of food. If you are not prepared with
a remedy, they will be justified in taking food for
themselves, and their families." [His Lordship
then read the note which he had taken of the
evidence respecting the paper alluded to].
Mr. O'CONNOR :- Yesterday, in the examination of Brierly, the Mayor of Stockport
was proved to have repeated these words; that is
the reason why I felt justified in bringing it
prominently before your Lordship.
The JUDGE:-I do not recollect that.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, Brierly, I

that within six months we shall have the popu- think, in speaking of what Booth had said on the
lons districts inthe north in a state ofsocial deso- 12th of August, said :-I do not advise so, but

44
when a great man like the Mayor of Stockport
advises so, I think all will be right."
Mr. DUNDAS :-It is not Brierly, but Little.
My Lord, you will find it in John Leach's speech
on the 12th of August, and also in the following speech, where it is mentioned again by
Booth.
Mr. SERGEANT MURPHY then read the
,wordsattributed to the Mayor of Stockport.
The JUDGE :-That is what Booth said afterwords.

&

Mr. O'CONNOR (to the witness) -You have
seen it in some paper ? Now, refresh your memory as to what paper you saw it in ? I have seen
the speech alluded to as having been made by
the Mayor of Stockport, both in the newspapers,
and in placards on the walls. How long may you
have seen it remaining on the walls of Stockport ?
For several days. You are a high-constable or
chief-constable ?-Now, did you give any orders
to your men to take that down ? Never. Now,
sir, did you see something of this kind placarded
on the walls of Stockport; headed a " Warning
Voice," with the following lines upon it:There is a cry throughout the land,
A fearful cry and full of dread!
Woe to oppression's heartless band!
A starving people cry for " Bread."
That cry was heard when guilty France
On the dread brink of ruin stood;
Yet sound the viol, speed the dance!
'Tis but the hungry cry for food!
I charge ye, England's rulers! grant
The justice that her sons demand!
Or, aroused, the demon power of want
Shall snatch the PIKE and wield the BRAND.

Have you seen that any where ? I do not know.
I have no recollection of it; but there were so
many placards published at the time that it
would be quite impossible to recollect all.
The JUDGE :-By many placards, you mean
many violent and inflammatory placards ? Yes.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Do you remember seeing
a placard headed" Murder, Murder, Murder !!!" ?
I do remember seeing it. Did you take that
placard down? I gave no directions respecting
it, nor am I aware that it was taken off. Did
you see among those placards that were posted,
one stating that the people would be justified in
revolting if they did not get bread? I really
cannot answer with certainty. Words to that
effect? I can't say. As near as you can ? There
were so many placards of an exciting character
posted daily, that it would be impossible to tell.
You were not ordered by the authorities to.

take down those placards? No. Now, I ask
you as chief of the police, were those placards,
in the state Stockport was then in, sufficient to
lead the people who were hungry, to excite.
ment ? They were. You were aware of the
mills being stopped? Yes, I saw them stopped.
Is it notorious that there has been a greater reduction in wages at Stockport than in any other
town? I cannot speak with certainty: I have
not heard that stated; I have heard other
places spoken of as having reduced more than
Stockport. Have there been considerable reductions in Stockport ? Yes. Now, sir, did you
see a placard headed with these words, " Murder, Murder, Murder-They that be slain with
the sword are better than they that be slain
with hunger; for these pine away stricken
through for want of the fruits of the field."
Did you see a placard of that description posted
in Stockport ? I saw one headed " Murder"
but I am not sure if that is it. I ask you, as
chief officer-as an honest man-by whom were
those placards put up, or by what parties ?
The JUDGE :-By whom ?-not by what
party ?
Mr. O'CONNOR.:-By whom? Did you see
the printer's names ? Yes. Do you recollect
any of the printer's names? No. Not one?
Did you see Gadsby's name at the bottom of
any of them? I have seen placards with
Gadsby's name to them; and also with Dalton's,
and others. Do you recollect any other names ?
Yes, several names; Lambert, and a number of
others. Now, you saw from 10,000 to 15,000
persons in the town? A great many more. On
that day? Yes. These placards were up at the
time? Some of them were. The mills were:
all stopped ? The mills were all stopped. With,
the exception of the attack on the workhouse,
and the taking of the bread, everything was
quiet and peaceable? No, sir, it was not peaceable. You did not hear any riot ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - Hear his
answer; he says it was not peaceable.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Then you did not hear
any exciting language? I heard no speaking at
the meeting. After the 20th, or about that
time, the riots began to subside? They did,
The JUDGE :-Is there any other of the defendants that wishes to ask the witness any question? [No answer.]
Re.-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
-You say you did not hear any exciting lan.
guage at the meeting? I was not sufficiently

near. Did you hear any language at all? I
heard the shoutings and huzzas of the multitudes as they passed through the town. But
you did not hear what was said? No. Then,
when you say you did not hear any exciting
when youreading
language, you mean that you did not hear any
language ? Yes. Youknow Bradshaw's ? Yes.
What are his premises ? A mill for the spinning
and manufacturing of cloth. Is it in Stockport,
or near it ? It is in Stockport. Did anything happen there ? The hands were turned
out;
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY :-Did you
say the hands were turned out? Yes. Where?
At Bradshaw's.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Do you remember Mr. Bradshaw's coming to the Town
Hall for assistance ? He sent. Did he get any ?
Not at that time. Were you present when he
sent? I was not present; I only know this by
report. Did you ever see that placard posted in
Stoekport? [Handing witness the " Executive
placard."]
Mr. MURPHY :-Does this arise out of the
cross-examination, Mr. Attorney-General ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Unquestionably, (To Witness)-Did you see anythinglike
that stuck up in Stockport? Yes. I do not
want to know if you remember it word for word;
but, looking at the beginning of it, can you.
speak to having seen one likeit ?
The JUDGE :-What is it ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-It is the
placard issued by the Executive Committee of
the National Chartist Association. Did you read
it ? Yes. At what time ? About the period when
the town was disturbed, but I could not speak to
the precise day. You said it was about the 11th
and 20th? It would be about that time, but I cannot speak to the day. Did you read it? Yes, I am
certain that I read it. Do you remember the
conclusion of it-about the God of justice and of
battle-Do you remember any of the words? Yes.
I am certain I saw a paper similar to that. Can
you fix the day on which you saw it ?
The JUDGE :-Consider, as well as you can,
when you saw it. It was during the time the
toew was disturbed, but I cannot speak to the
precise day, my Lord.
Mr.DUNDAS:-Perhaps your Lordship would
ask him whether it was in the early part of
the Atime, or

rea&?
WITN

paper coming from the Chartists' Association.
What was it about? It was an address to the
Chartists. But what about? I cannot pretend to
say. How do you know that it is similar? I am
speaking from the heading of it, and the general
of it. What do you mean by the general
reading of it? From seeing it on the walls; I am
certain it was a similar paper. Is it from the
heading of it, or from the subject matter generally? Yes. What is the subject matter of it
generally ? I cannot say. And yetyou have sworn
that you know it from the subject matter, its general appearance, and other things. I ask you
again, what is the meaning of the paper you are
swearing to ? It is an address to the Chartists'
Association.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - From the
general appearance of this placard you are able
to state that you saw a paper that resembles it ?
Yes.
THOMAS BARRINGTON examined by the
ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- Are you governor
of the Stockport workhouse? Yes. On Thursday, the 11th of August, was your attention
drawn to the crowds outside the workhouse?
Yes. Does any part of the workhouse abut on
the public street ? Yes, the lodges. In consequence of anything told you, did you go to the
front of the workhouse-to where the lodge isto see anything that was going on ? Yes. What
did you see? Several thousands of people. Had
they anything in their hands ? They had sticks
and bludgeons. What were they doing? They
were going by at that time. What next took
place ? I went into the yard from the ground
between the lodges and the board-room. I
went through there to an inner-yard. What
next took place ? We had not been there more
than a few minutes, when somebody said, " They
broke in." Did you see what next occurred?
No, sir, for they made their appearance instantly.
Where, .fIn the inner-yard. Well, what then
did they do They came in thousands, and en
did they do? They came in thousands, and entered into the house. I think you said they
came in thousands? Yes, sir, some thousands.
Entered into the house ? Yes. Did they -take
possession of the place? Yes. Did they go
where they liked? Yes. Well, what did they
do? They took all the food that was in the
house. They took seven hundred loaves, upwards of 71b. each. Did they take any money? '

shortly after the riot act was Yes.

Did they do any damage ? Yes.

What?

They shattered several doors to pieces. Did
a
S:-I cannot speak precisely. I know they injure the windows? Yes; they broke

At last, I believe, the
I saw one similar to that, but I cannot speak to number of windows.
drove them away ? Yes.
he time. What was the paper about? It was a military came and

46
Cros-examined by Mr. DUNDAS:-Pray,
Mlr. Bumble,* I beg pardon, Mr. Barrington, I
meant.-Was it known that you kept thatquantity
in the workhouse? Yes; we usually have that
quantity in the house. How much money was
there taken? X6 and upwards. Where was it ? In
the collecting officer's department. Was it in
small money ? It was in copper, and half-crowns.
such
VWould a sum as £7 in half-crowns, and other
small money,be laidout on the counter for paying?
It might, as that was pay-day. What windows
were broken? Windows were broken in different
parts of the honse, where the mob broke in.
Where they on the ground floor ? Yes: doors
also were broken, on the ground floor, where the
m6ob entered. How long might they be with you
altogether ? From the time they entered, till the
mnayor and the authorities came, it would be an
hour. In what room is the bread kept ? It is
stowed away in various rooms. Always on the
ground floor? Yes. Is the room in which you
pay the men, adjoining these rooms? Yes.
Partly separated from them by a door.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Well,
Barrington, you do not live on workhouse fare?
'Yes. Well, you are a good specimen. This
mob entered in a general scuffle ?-a rush ? Yes.
Such a rush as coming against d6ors, or windows,
would be likely to smash them? They did smash
them. Was the Mayor of Stockport with them
at first ? No. I believe you are as likely a person as any to know the state of the working
classes, respecting the alteration of wages ? No.
Don't you know anything about the increased
number of inmates in the workhouse ? They were
rather numerous at that time. Did they do you
mauch personal injury ? None, whatever. I believe the master of a workhouse is not, in general,
a very popular man-at least he is not so in excited times ? I cannot say. But you know you
were not injured ? I was not injured, but I
ijubted it very much.
THE JUDGE :-He doubted it very much ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-He doubted whether he
was hurt or not, my Lord. [To the witness.]

Have you heard a great deal about the reduction of wages ? I do not interfere in that matter
at all. Have you heard any thing about it?
Some little thing, but not much. You have not
heard of the prevailing distress in Stockport
consequent on the reduction of wages ? No, I
have not. Not a wdrd? No. You may go
down.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Perhaps your
Lordship will allow me to give notice to the
witness Crompton to be close at hand, but not
to come into Court.
The JUDGE :-Certainly.
Mr. MURPHY :-Within ear-shot.
WILLIAM MOORE examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What are you ? A dresser at
Marple. How far is that from Stockport ? They
call it five miles. You say you are a dresser ?
Yes. Were you working in the month of August
last ? Yes. Where? In Shepley's mills. What
direction is Marple from Stockport ?-Is it towards Manchester, or the other way ? It is the
other way. Do you remember any number of
persons coming to Shepley's mills ? Yes. On
what day? I believe it was the 10th of August.
On what day of the week? Wednesday. Did
you see them when they came ? Yes. In what
numbers did they come ? When they came up
to our mill, perhaps there were about 200 of
them. What did they do or say? They mustered, and our master and a parcel of the men
assembled on the canal bridge, near the end of
the mill.
The JUDGE :--Your master-that is Mr.
Shepley ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What did
the men say or do ? They said they wanted the
hands turned out of the mill.
The JUDGE :-That is, the multitude which
you say made about 250 ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What did
Shepley do ? He stopped the mills and turned

* This unintentional mistake on the part of Mr. Dundas, which produced so much laughter in
Court, is thus accounted for in the Manchester Guardian, of March the 15th. During the examination-in-chief of Mr. Barrington, the master of the Stockport workhouse, one of the barristers en.gaged for the defendants, said, in conversation with Mr. Dundas, that he had been reading" Oliver
Twist," and alluded to the delineation of the character of Mr. Bumble. Immediately after the
turn came of Mr. Dundas to cross-examine the witness, and he commenced-" Well, Mr. Bumble,"-but immediately, and we may add, painfully conscious of this involuntary lapsus lingue (for
Mr. Dundas is ever remarkable for his courtesy at the bar), he added,-" I beg your pardon, Mr.
Barrington, I mean." The joke went further than Mr. Dundas wished; even the learned judge's
gravity was disturbed; Sir James Graham, who was seated on the bench, and then in attendance as a
witness, was greatly diverted. As for the bar and the defendants, many laughed aloud, and
amongst those who seemed most keenly to enjoy the embarrassment and confusion of Mr. Dundas,
was Mr. Sergeant Murphy, whose laugh rang through the Court.

47
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Verylately
the hands out. HIow many hands had Shepley
at that time--t work ? About 500 or 600. I was before the Court of Queen's Bench, on a
Now, did you see "on that day any meeting of similar subject, and it was laid down that a perpersons, or any.procession ? No. Either that son of the same name with the defendant, need
not be identified with the actual party on the
day or the next ? The next day, I did, Where
record.
the
did you see them ? I saw them coming on
Mr. DUNDAS,:-I think that in this case
Waterloo road i% Stockport. In what way did
there is a great difference, for here there are two
they go along ? They came in about ten or a dozen defendants on the record of the name of Leach,
a-breast. Did they march in procession ?-Was so that non constat.
there any regularity or order in their moveThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-We will
ments ? Yes, good order; they had their sticks
identify him by his conduct immediately. [To
horizontal in their hands. So that by holding
the witness]-A person said something about pri.
a stick they kept in line ? Yes. How far across
soners; now, who was it that said anything about
the road did they reach ? There' wis hardly any prisoners ? I could not hear, but some of them
passing on either side. tHow many were there ? said they must go to the workhouse to see about
A very great number. How long did you watch prisoners. Was that said by the persons standthem going by ? Above half an hour. It took ing round the chairman ? Yes. How far offwere
that time for the people to pass ? I believe it you from the chairman ? Well, I suppose I was
did, or thereabouts. Now, how many of them 100 yards. Did you hear it ? Yes. Then I
had sticks ? The majority of them had ticks, need hardly ask you, whether the people around
I did the chairm n must have heard it as well as you?
I believe. Did they create any alarm
not see any alarm. Was there any meeting? It was said that two or three of them must go,
and see ifthey could get the prisoners released.
Yes, there was a meeting about the middle of Well, what then? I went off and left them. Was
sane day ? Yes. There that all they said? Did they say anything about
Waterloo. Was it that
was a chairman appointed ? Yes. Any speakers ? coming back again ? They said if they were not
Yes, there were spe :krs. Did you know the back in a certain time, they might know that they
name of any of the speakers . Well, I don't had themselves been taken into custody. After
know, only their names were announced as they that was said, did anybody go away towards the
began to speak. One of them was Christopher workhouse ? Yes, I went off then. Where dik
Doyle, and the other was Leach. Did you you go to ? I went round the town as far as Mr.
I heard there was some
know Doyle ? No, I did not see him there. Bradshaw's mill, where
waited there till they had all
was there. damage done. I
Who else was there ? Muirhouse
Waterloo, and then I came off Waterloo
Did you hear any resolution put ? Yes, they put got off
to come home to Marple.
whether they would cease working
a resolution,
The JUDGE :-How soon before you retill they would receive an advance of wages, or
turned ? Perhaps an hour or two before I got
till the Charter became the law of the land.
(Repeat it again.) They put a resolution whether back again.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-When you
they would cease working till they should receive an advance of wages, or till the Charter got back again to Waterloo-road, did anybody
became the law of the land; and it was carried tell the meeting about what had been done?
that they should cease working till the Charter As I was going off Waterloo-road, I heard a
become the law of the land. Did you see a noise, and turned back. I saw Leach and
person named Leach there? Yes, I saw him Doyle. They were linked arm-in-arm. Several
that they said was Leach. Was there anything of the people ran and shook hands with them.
The JUDGE :-Before they dispersed, you
said about his going after some prisoners?
Mr. DUNDAS :-Is that the same Leach that mean ? (No answer.)
is on this record ?
The ATTORNEY.GEINERAL :-Leach and
The ATTORNEY.- GENERAL:- We will Doyle were coming back again, linked arm-intake it so, until we have some other person of the arm, and several went to shake hands with
same name.
them ? Yes. Did any one give an account of
The JUDGE :-A person named Leach, of
what they did? Yes; they got on a wall, and
as going from a former meetHyde, is spoken to
had
ing to Stockport, and here you have, at a meeting Leach addressed them, and told them what
in Stockport, a person of that name, and from happened. He said, they had been to the workthat place: you cannot have a clearer identification.

house, and had seen the Mayor and the magis-

48
trates; and the magistrates and the Mayor told
him that there had been some money taken
from the drawer, and they had taken him to the
drawer, and shown him where the money had
been taken from. He said the Mayor was very
kind with him, and the magistrates too. He
whether
asked themthey could release the
asked them whether they could release the pri.
soners, and the Mayor said Phe could not-it
would be violating the law; but if they would
go off, he would perhaps release them in the
course of an hour, or an hour and a half. Did
he mention anything about the soldiers or the
cavalry ? Yes; he said the soldiers were there,
and they trembled like an aspen leaf. Did he
do anything? He shaked his hand, and said
they trembled like an aspen leaf. He exhibited

men, we are met here this nprning, not to
discuss a question of wages, but to see whether
live exertion
you are content
are willing to usetoevery slaves, orinwhether you
your power
to make the Charter become the law of the
land. You may obtain an equal representation,
and place yourselves upon an equal footing with
your tyrannical masters. If you was to go to
work to-morrow, you would be hundred times
worse than you was before you left work; but
if you will resolve to work no more until the
Charter becomes the law of the land, you will
make them glad to give you anything you want."

tions.
JAMES CROMPTON examined by Mr
WORTLEY :---Are you a constable of the Stockport division ? Yes. Were you on duty on the
15th of August last, at Marple ? Yes. What number of persons were there? Nearly 1000. Did
you see who was in the chair? I did. Who
was that? Joseph Taylor, of Marple-bridge.
Did you see Taylor there ? Yes. Was he near
the chairman? Yes. Did you hear what the
chairman said ? I did. Tell us as near as you
can-did you take any notes,? Yes; I took
I
them
When didn. you take he as ?sak? took
some.therea
Whae
them at ,he meeting. While he was speaking?
Yes. These notes you have now are the same,
and in the same state? Yes. Well, read them;

With
Hov was that received by the meeting? With
cheers. Did he chairman then introduce any
person as a speaker? He introduced Christopher
Doyle, of Manchester. Did Doyle address the
meeting? He did, sir. What did he say? He said
S" Friends and fellow-workmen, we are not met
here this morning for any party object, but for a
national object,-an object upon which depends
your slavery or freedom." He then went on with
a great deal of abuse of the government (I have
not the particulars), and then said: " Perhaps
you will want to know from me how to get the
Charter. You must work no more till it becomes
the law of the land; and you that have money ia
the banks and other places, must fetch it out, and
stop the supplies of the government. Then you
will make them glad to give you anything you
may want. You ill, perhaps, want to know how
you are to get meat. Lord Kinnaird said, in the
House of Lords the other day, if he wanted food
he would take it where he could find it; now
your tyrannical masters will have no objection to
your doing what Lord Kinnaird said hewould do.
I tell you, if you want food, take it where you can
find it, if your masters will nt relieve you." All
that you lave been telling us last was spoken by
Doyle, was it? It was. Did he propose any resolutionw? He did. What was it? He proposed
that there shouldbe no more work till the Charter
became the law of the land. That was the reso.
lution, was it? It was, sir. Was that resolution
put to the meeting ? It was, sir, by the chairman.
And what was done upon it ? There was a unanimous show of hands in favour of it. After the
resolution was adopted, did Doyle say anything
more ? He said, " I see you are all Chartists, and
there's a meeting of Chartist delegates to day at
Manchester."Mr. MURPHY:-What day of the month
was that ?
Mr.uWORTLEY:-Thetth.
WITNESS continued-" And you must elect a
person to go there."
He then proposed that
Mr. Joseph Taylor, the chairman, should be
elected. There was a show of hands, and he
was elected a delegate to go to Manchester.

whai did he say?

Afterheywas elected, didcTaylor say anything

his own hand?

Yes.

Did you afterwards see

any of these parties on the 15th of August ?
Yes.
The JUDGE :-That was the following Monday? Yes; Doyle was then at a meeting at
Marple. The meeting was held at ten o'clock
in the forenoon. How many people were collected together? Many hundreds. Was there
a chairman? Yes. And speakers ? Yes. You
say Doyle was there? Yes. Who was in the
chair? A man named Joseph Taylor was in the
chair.
Mr. MURPHY :-Was Taylor one of the defendants ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-No.
Mr. MURPHY :-Taylor was chairman.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- How long
did that meeting last? Nearly an hour. Did
you hear what was said ? No; I was too far
off.
Mr. MURPHY :-I don't ask you any ques-

"Friends, and fellow-work-

fow was that received by the meeting?

4f
moreto the meeting ? He said he felt proud that
they had elected him as their representative.
" I tell you," said he, " that you must stick firm
one to another, and workno more till the Charter'
becomes the law of the land. I will go to Manchester, and represent you there." Was that
meeting adjourned? It was. Where to? Possett
Bridge. What time was it adjourned?' At ten
o'clock. 'They went there immediately. Was it
said what they were to go there for? To give their
delegate proper instructions. Their delegate was
Taylor. Taylor, I believe, is now under sentence ? He is, sir. Did the mob move off then ?
Yes, sir. In which direction ? They went towards Macclesfield canal, and went along the
canal-side, in the direction of Possett Bridge.
Was any of them armed at the time? Yes; many
of them were armed with sticks and bludgeons.
Did they afterwards go to the Peak Forest Canal;
or is that a different canal from the one you have
mentioned ? Theywent to the junction. As they
were going towards that junction of canals, did
you see who were at the head of them ? Taylor and
Doyle. Is there a stringof locks there? Yes. Which
canalare the locks on ? On the Peak Forest Canal.
Were there any boats passing at the time? Yes.
Did you see anything done to these boats? The
mob tied the boats to the side of the canal,
and drove the horses away from the boats.
The mob told the boatmen that if they went any
further they would sink their boats. How many
boats were there ? Seven or eight. At the time
that was done, bow far off was Doyle ? He
was at the head of the mob. How far was he
from where the boats were ? Perhaps forty or
fifty yards.
Mr. MURPHY :-In advance? Yes, in advance.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Where did the mob go to
next? They went to the top lock of the Peak
Forest Canal. How far is that from the junetion? It is close to the junction, sir. Was Doyle
still leading them? He was, sir. Did you follow?
I did. What did you see done? The mob went
to the lock, and I went too, and charged them
not to do any damage to it, and they threatened
to throw me into the canal if I attempted to
stop them. Did you then see what they did ?
Yes, I stood by till I saw them pulling the lock
in pieces. What do you mean by pulling the
lock in pieces ? They pulled the bolt out on
which the door of the lock moves, and threw
the lock door across the canal. Did that take
them a long time to do? About twenty minutes,
or so. What was the effect of that gate being

the canal was stopped. Without working that
lock the navigation could not go on ? No, sir, it
could not. How long was the navigation stopped
in consequence ? I think about two days-I
am not certain. Was there much traffic on
that canal? Yes, sir. While they were doing as
you say (taking the gate down) what was the
rest of the mob doing? One part of the mob
went to Possett Bridge, while the others were
breaking the lock down? About 200 or 300.
Were they shouting? Yes. When? When
they accomplished the taking down of the lock
door.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-Were
you ordered by the magistrates to go out to a
meeting, where you took notes ? No, sir. Did
you go of your own head ? Yes, sir. You took
notes of your own head ? Yes, I thought it my
duty as a constable, when so much damage was
done in the village, to go and see what they
would do further. Did you take notes of all
that was done ? I took down all that I took
down. Well, it is no boast to tell us that ! Did
you take down all? There is one resolution
which I did not take down. Did you leave out
part of what was said by the speakers ? No.
Then, am I to understand that you did not take
all down ? I did not. Did you leave out such
portions as suited your taste ? No. You left
out some portions; such as those about the
government ? He was getting so warm that I
could not take it *down. He was stating so
many sums that people were getting as pension
from the government, that I could not take it
down. Was it that you were so shocked, that
you could not take them down ? Well, I thought
there was no necessity for taking it down.
What did you go to take down ? What I
thought proper. Did you not go to take
down what was against the Chartists? I went
to take down whatever resolutions they might
come to about destroying property. Did not
you go to take down whatever was said by the
Chartists? No, I was not aware that it was
a Chartist meeting. When you found it was
a Chartist meeting, you took down what waI
against the Chartist ? Do I understand you to
say so? Yes. Were you the only officer there ?
I was the only officer there, except a few special
constables. Did any of them take notes ? Not
that I am aware of. Is any of them here? Moor,
I believe was there. Anybody else ? None, that
have come here as witnesses, I believe. Very

uncollared? The effect was that the navigation of well, when the meeting dissolved, did they go

50
away peaceably ? They went away peaceably towards the canal. I don't think you told us what
number there might have been there ? There was
near upon a thousand. Did you know Doyle
before ? No. From anything said at the time,
could you make out that he was then a turn-out ?
He stated, that he was going to different places
lecturing. I ask you, did you, from anything
that Doyle himself said, or anything that was
said at the meeting, mnake out that Doyle was a
turn-out ? I understood he was not. I understood he was going about lecturing. Well, he
might be a turn-out for all that. A man not in
work has more time to go about lecturing ? I did
not understand himto be a turn-out. He said
he was going to Bury, and different parts of the
Was there anything said
country lecturing.
about his being a turn-out? No; Did you know
in what way of work he was, as a workman?
No, I did not. You do not know that now,
even? No, I do not. Now, with regard to the
other man, Taylor, from anything said at that
meeting, did you make out that he was a turnout ? No. Did you know him before? He had
worked at a mill, but then he was a clogger.
man mill had he worked in ? Yes.
That issort of who makes wooden shoesbefore
What a

What sort of mill had he worked in before ?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Let the man
answer the question.
Mr. Mc OUBREY :-He is proceeding to answer another question-I want him to answer
sa so still. And
that question.I
are you not conscious that you are not telling
the whole truth? I am conscious that I amt
telling the truth as far as I have told. I am
not asking you that: I am not saying that you
are telling a direct falsehood, but have you told
the whole truth ? I am conscious that I have
not told all that passed at that meeting. Were
you not conscious that, at the time you took
at
those notes, you could not tell all
that meeting? I knew that I could not rehearse
what I left out of my notes. Did not you intend to leave it out of your notes ? Yes. Then
did not you believe that the man who thus fits
himself not to tell the whole truth, is perjuring
himself ?
The JUDGE :-You cannot ask a man that.
Mr. Mc OUBREY :-I do not say that he is
doing so, my Lord, but if the man who thusfits
truth
himself to tell the whole book. is not perjuring
[Witness ands
himself. Shew me your
himself. Shew me your book. [Witness bands

I believe he worked in Andrew's mill. For how
long had he ceased working in that mill? Per- theCross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Where
h hcad orkinghinithaet book to Mr. O'Connor.]
un
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Where
haps, twelve months. And had he begun as a
in
clogger after that? Yes. And where did he did you stand? Near the cart. You were
the throng ? Yes. You wrote down in this book
live ? At Marple, Bridge, one part of his time.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY:-I pre- every thing as it passed at the time? Yes. Nosume you are well known to many of the people thing afterwards? No, sir. Not a word ? No,
at Marple, as constable of the district ? Yes. with the exception of what the chairman said
Are you a short-band-writer, or
Now, were you in a position that they could afterwards.
see you taking these notes? In fact they might have you ever been a reporter? No, sir. Did
see me. Well, did you make any concealment he speak very distinctly and slowly ? What I
about it, or did you do it openly ? I did it openly. took down was at the beginning and end of his
Have you any doubt that a great number of theZ
it down in this hand dispersons there said you were taking potes ?_ speech. You took
shewn to you ? None. Not tinctlv, and you never have been a reporter?
Was any molestation
who
in the least ? No. What is the distance from Yes. Well, sir, you think that those men
this junction, where the canal joins, to the Possett were going to arrest the wheels of government,
and withdraw their money from the banks, were
Bridge? Perhaps 300 or 400 yards.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mc OUBREY :- turn-outs ? A quantity of them was. I think
Have you ever been a witness before you took you said that a great many of those at the
these notes at that meeting ? Yes. Then, I pre- meeting you went to, were Chartists? I did not
sume, you have some notion of the terms of a know what they.were till I went there. But
witness's oath? Yes. You know, sirt, that the you went to the meeting in consequence of the
witess is to tell the truth-the whole truth ? damae that was done? Yes. You expected it
Yes. Now, I ask you on your oath, the time
you took those notes, did not you expect you was a meeting of the parties who did that dashould be called upon to give evidence of them in mage ? I did. And you went to prevent the
a court of justice ? I did. Were you not con- recurrence of it ? Yes. You did not know that
scious, sir, that you did not take down the whole they were Chartists ? I did not know what they
truth ? No, I was conscious that I did take were till I went to the meeting -I thought they
down the whole truth.- You were conscious were turn-outs. Now, I have to ask you not
that you took down the whole truth !-Did notoI
you admit you only took down what made against
the Chartists ?-Did not you say so, sir.

only whether you took down the whole truth,
but that all you took down was true ? It was.

61
Was there not a resolution passed ? Yes. What
was it ? Mr. Robinson, a print master, had his
works stopped, and Christopher Doyle proposed
that he should be allowed to run his machinery,
and finish somue pieces that were damaging; and
that all the sours and liquid should be saved.
Why not tell that part of the resolution ? I have
told it. Why not tell it in the first instance,
before it was dragged out of you ?
The JUDGE:-He was not asked it.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Did you hear any resolution like this passed at that meeting ?-" That,
believing this country to be on the eve of a revolution, and being utterly without hope that
the legislature will accord justice to the starving
millions, a requisition be forthwith prepared,
signed, and forwarded to the members of this
borough, calling upon them, in conjunction with
other liberal members, to offer every possible
opposition to the taxing of a prostrate people,
for the purpose of a bread-taxing aristocracy,
by argument and other constitutional impediments, that the wheels of Government may be
arrested through the rejection or prevention of
all votes of supply." That resolution was not
passed there ?-It was not there that was
passed? N o, sir. Did you hear anything
about that in Stockport ? No, sir. Inspeaking
of your passage along the banks of the canal, I
think you said Doyle was considerably in advance of those who broke the lock, and stopped
the boats? Yes. Now, was there any recommending of force ? They delayed the boatmen.
I am talking of the meeting at Marples; was it
not said there that they would be a hundred
times worse if they returned to work than they
were before ?-Are you not aware that there
was a reduction of half their wages proposed,
and that if they returned to work their condition would be a hundred times worse ? I am
aware that there was a large reduction proposed.
A meeting of delegates, you say, was on the
15th ? Yes. And a resolution was put in your
presence, as to whether the men should go back
to work with the prospect of being a hundred
times worse ? Yes. That resolution was put
to the meeting, plainly and openly? It was.
Now, at that meeting did you hear any violent
language as to physical force ? No further than
telling them if they were short of meat where
they could find it. Did the speaker quote any
authority for that ? He quoted Lord Kinnaird.
Did he quote any other authority? No. Was
the Maor of Stockport

quoted ? No.

you ever heard the Mayor of Stockport recom-

mending that course ? No. You belong to the
police of Stockport ? I do not reside there ; I
belong to the county, not to the borough. Did
you ever hear in Stockport, or in the neighbourhood, that the Mayor of Stockport saidThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--Is that, my
Lord, right ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-We have got Lord Kinnaird, and I wish to put him in company with
the Mayor of Stockport.
The JUDGE:-You have' a meeting at a
public-house; what is that ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-That is a meeting at a
Manchester public-house, to which the delegates
were elected to go, my Lord. (To the Witness)
-Did it come to your knowledge, air, as constable, that great complaints were made by the
working people that they were turned out of
work? It did. Were you aware of the state
of the working-classes generally,-that they
were at that time very much distressed ? I was
not aware of the circumstance. Did they com.
plain of being very much distressed? Yes; I
was aware of their complaints. Were you no
aware that wages were below existence-pilit ?
Yes. And were you aware that they complained
of that? Yes. Did you bear anything of the
meetings of shopkeepers ? Not a word. Was
any reference made to the meetings of shopkeepers? Not a word.
Now, refresh your
memory? There was a meeting on the 10th,
at which Muirhouse was present, and he stated
that all donations from masters and others
would be handed over to the shopkeepers' committee in Hyde.
The JUDGE :-That all the donations-what
is that ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-That all the donations
they received from the masters in the countr
should be handed over to the shopkeepers' conm
mittee. (To the witness.) The donations came
from the gentlemen and masters of the country ?
Why, Muirhouse led the mob up to the mills and
frightened it out of them.
That was the way in
which the donations came ? Yes; he led the mob
up to the gentlemen's houses and got the donations from them. What house did he lead them
to ? To Mr. Clayton's, for one. Tell us more?
Mr. Shepley's. How many hands had Shepley
employed ? 500. .Was his mill stopped at that
time ? Yes. I suppose you are aware that gentlemen and master munufacturers are not Chartists? I do not know. Are you aware whether the shopkeepers' committee was a Chartist
Have committee,
or a shopkeepers' committee ? I do

UNIVERSITY OM
ILLINOIS L'

62
able Mr. Robinson to work out the goods which
were unfinished ? Yes. Where did Mr. Robinton live ? In a place called Strands, near
Marple.
The JUDGE :--What is that ?
Mr. WORTLEY:-He stated in answer to
to
Mr. O'Connor, that there was another resolution
passed, of which he took no note, which resolution was to give leave to Mr. Robinson to work
Lordship to see this book for the purpose of out the goods which were in the souts.
The JUDGE :-It will be absolutely necessaying, whether it is possible that the witness
could have written it in that clean hand at the i sary when I come to sum up, to take the evitime the speeches were made. He professes to I dence in the way it was takenin Stafford. There
were several parties there, andafter Chief Justice
reportThe JUDGE:-It is a question for the jury Tindal summed up from his notes, he then put
and not for me. They had, perhaps, better look iit to the Jury, as to each person that was on his
at it now.
trial, whether he was guilty, or not guilty, and
A juror requested to have the book, and also a they wrote down their verdict privately, as to
witness. They t
book produced by a previous
oud
roed
d them e aout toie inTheieach particular prisoner; (here it will be as to
ee
would rather see them when about to-give in their
each defendant), and it has occurred to me toverdict.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL :-I have no :day, that I cannot possibly do justice to the
objection; but am anxious that the book should parties without doing so. Therefore, I wish to
be submitted to the jury as soon as it becomes say to the jury, that they will not have to decide
eu masse.
evideunce
A JUROR:-In the'first place we must say,
The JUDGE:--It is suggested that the witness is untrue, on the ground that he could not whether they are comparatively guilty ?
have taken a consecutive note in that way.
The JUDGE :-They must all be guilty of the
A JUROR :-Do you wish us to say now, my same offence. You cannot say that one man is
Lord, whether a consecutive note could be taken guilty of one offence, and another of another; all
so cleanly ?
you find guilty you must find guilty of the same
The JUDGE :--Mr. O'Connor objects to the offence. I have stopped for the purpose that you
notes, on the ground, that they could not be taken may collect yourselves. [The Judge then handed
cleanly and consecutively in the way the witness the jury a list of the defendants]. Now, by lookhas stated.
ing through that list, you will find that when I
Mr. WORTLEY (To Witness):--Have you come to sum up, I shall shew what evidence aptold us all that of which you took a note ? I plies to each particular defendant, and you will
have. Was there a considerable portion of the be thus greatly relieved from perplexity in giving
speeches of which you took no note ? Yes, there your verdict.
Mr. WORTLEY :- They may possibly be
was a considerable deal said in abuse of the
government, of which I took no note. 11ad found guilty on several counts.
The JUDGE:-You cannot lump a great numyou the means of writing without being jostled?
Yes. Did you stand in front of the waggon, or her of defedants together, because one may be
on one side? On one side. Where was the guilty of one misdemeanour and another of
principal jostling of the waggon? Chiefly in another. They must be all guilty of the same
front. You said you went to that meeting in offence.
Mr. MURPHY :-It is quite obvious thatthe
consequence of the damage done? Yes. What
damage was there done? I allude to the damage course your Lordship points out is the right one,
appear for
done at the shops and public-houses in the town- inasmuch as I and my learned friends
differently affected
of
bship Marple. Every shop and public-house, defendants, who will be very
and therefore we sever our denearly, in the village of Marple was robbed. by the evidence,
edi fence, and confine each case to particular
Whenearyithepae-Onthe10
When did that take place ? On the 10th. And counsel.
Examination resumed by Mr. WORTLEY:it was in consequence of that you felt it
your duty to attend these meetings, and see Before that resolution was passed, did you hear
what passed ? It was. You say there was an- of any resolution put to the meeting, giving leave

not know. Are you not aware that that comrninittee was appointed to receive donations out of
Which the persons out of employment were to
be kept ? No. I wish your Lordship to see that
book.
Re-examined by Mr. WORTLEY:-This is
the book in obse it iyou took notes? Yes. Yu
which
Yes. I
witte
ne?
k
obmade no corrections itten sipncil? oYes. You
it
made no corrections in it since ? No.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, I wish your

other resolution passed at that meeting, to en- to Mr. Robinson to finish what work he hadi

hand ? One of Mr. Robinson's managrs asked
permission of the meeting, to work his cloth.oun
of the sours with safety. Mr. Robinson's printworks had been stopped, and he did not wish to
have the property damaged. You heard him
apply for that purpose, did you? Yes; I believe
if the cloth lay in the sours for a certain time,
they would be destroyed. Well, to whom did he
apply then? To the chairman. What was done
on that ? Christopher Doyle said he allowed them
to work in other places in a similar way and he
proposed that Mr. Robinson'smen should also be
allowed to work. A resolution was then passed
giving permission to do so. You were asked by
,Mr. O'Connor, whether there was any violence at
the time the boats were stopped?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-No, I did not: I asked
whether there was any violent language used at
the meeting.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Mr. O'Connor asked first,
-whetherthe meeting was peaceable, and then he,
,the witness), went on and said "They told the
boatmen."Mr. O'CONNOR :-I said I did not ask
him about the boatmen, but about the meeting.
The JUDGE :-You are perfectly right, Mr.
O'Connor, you said "I do not ask you about
that-I am talking of the meeting at Marples."
If you now wish any question to be asked, I will
ask it for you.
Mr. WORTLEY :-You heard that the delegates were to go to a public house in Manchester? Did you know the name of the public
house ? No. You heard Muirhouse say, that all
the donations were to go to the shopkeepers
committee; where was that meeting held? In
Marples. Was that on the same day the violent
language was uttered ? Itwas after they had been
in a shop for bread and cheese, and in a public
house for beer: they held the meeting in a public
house.
The JUDGE :-Did they go to the shops?
Yes, they went into a shop, and took the loaves
off the counter.
Mr. WORTLEY :-You say they went with
the mob to Clayton's and Shepley's; -was that
before or after the 10th? It was the same day,
-while making their speeches, a man whispered
to Muirhouse that Clayton and Shepley were
going to commence again. Muirhouse immediately dissolved the meetingand said " follow
me, and, if they dare to start their mills again,
they will be pulled down from top to bottom."
Was there any person that you knew but Muirhouse ? No. After that, where did they go ?
He [Muirhouse] led them down to Clayton's
mill.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Ifyour Lordship asks that
uesvion I will be obiicd.

The JUDGE :-What is it ?
Mr. WORTLEY :-Merely what he heard the
mob saying to the boatmen.
The JUDGE :-What did you hear the mob
saying to the boatmen? Witness :-They told
the boatman if they attempted to move the boats
any farther, they would sink them.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I wish you to ask whether
or no Doyle, when he proposed the resolution
not reported, was not acting as a mediator for
SMr. Robinson.
The JUDGE:-It is hardly necessary to ask
it, for it is obvious. He says, some one came
down and mentioned it; and, in -consequence of
that communication, Doyle proposed, that, as injury was likely to happen to Mr. Robinson by
not working out that which was in course of
manufacture, he must be at liberty to do so.
Mr. MURPHY :-We heard a general phrase
as to going into shops, and robbing them. Now,
I want to fix that definitively, whether they
wentinto any shops, except for food and drink ?
Was there any other robbing besides that of
bread and beer ?
The JUDGE :-Was.there any other robbing,
besides that of bread and beer ? Only drink.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Would your Lordship ask
this witness, what time the disturbances began
to cease ?
WITNESS :-We had no particular disturbanee in Marple after the 20th.
ABRAHAM LONGSON, examined by Sir
GREGORY LEWIN:--What are you ? lam one
of the Stockport police. On the 15th of August,
was there a meeting ? Yes. Where ?On the Waterloo-road. Was it a large meeting? It was
attended by 5,000 or 6,000 people. Was there
a chairman? Yes. What was his name? John
Wright. Were you there? Yes. Did you continue there during the whole time ? I did. Did
you mate any notes, immediately after, of what
passed ? Immediately after the meeting broke
up, I went and made some. Who was the first
speaker?
SMr. DUNDAS :-Are these the
notes, my
friend? A person of the name of Sawyer.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Are these the
notes ? I did not write myself-a person who
was with me wrote, and I dictated. Did you
dictate this immediately after the meeting had
taken place ? I did. Did you read them over
immediately afterthey were taken down? I did.
Were they correct ? Yes. You said the first
person that spoke was a person name! Jseph
Sawyer ? Yes. Did you know the person nanmed

54
Pilling ? Yes. Was he present at that meeti g ?
Yes.What did Saw yer do ? He proposed that
John Wright should take the chair. After him
who was the next speaker ? A person named
John Newton.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Is he a defendant ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-No, he is not.
WITNESS :-After Wright had taken the
chair, he proposed, " that whoever introduced
any subject not connected with that of wages
should be put down; he told them they must
get their wages, and if they could not, they must
ask their masters why they' could not give it
them; and if they told them it was through the
'top shop,' (the government,) they must ask
their masters to go with them as commanders
and sergeants, and find them with bread and
cheese on the road.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Before you go on allow me
to look at your paper? [Witness hands the
notes to Mr. Dundas.] Had you such good pen
and ink as to write it out thus at the meeting ?
The JUDGE :--Not at the meeting, but immediately after the meeting was over.
WITNESS continued "And to go to the
Duke of \\'llington ? and if that would not do
to go to Buckingham Palace, and the House of
Commons, and the House of Lords, or whatever
they have a mind to call it, and demand from
them to take all restriction off."
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Was that all that
Newton then said ? Yes, that I can remember.
Who spoke next? The Chairman. What did
he say ? He said he would not go to London.
They must take the responsibility upon themselves, for he would not go to London.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Who said this ?

Was that all that Brown said ? Yes. Who followed Brown ? Rd.Pilling, What didPillingsay?
" Fellow-townsmen, for I may so call you, having
lived amongst you so long, and having been at so
many meetings, by thousands, and have been in
prison. I do not know whether it would be
safe for me to own it or not; but I may avow
that I have the honour to be father of this
movement, and the sole cause of your being
ladies and gentlemen at the present time; for
the masters of Ashton had thought proper to
offer a reduction of 25 per cent. upon their
wages. I then caused the bellman to go round
and call the meeting, swearing by the God of
heaven, that, if the reduction took place, we
would annihilate the system, and cause the day
of reckoning. I then addressed a meeting of
12,000. I then went to Stalybridge, and addressed a meeting of 10,000. I then addressed a
meeting at Hyde of 10,000, and at Dukinfield
of 5,000. At every meeting they came to a resolution to work no more till they got the sam
wages as they had in February, 1840." He then
said, he addressed a meeting at Royton, who
came to the same resolution. He said he then
called a meeting at Oldham.
The JUDGE :-He said so? Yes, my Lord.
But there they were taken by surprise, " and I
had to come back, with five other of the speakers
against me. In consequence of that, the people of
Oldham were not out, but I was determined next
'morning to go and drub them out.'
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Is it drub or drum?
Witness :-Drub. I went accordingly, and met
them at eight o'clock, where one of them attacked me, and I gave him a floorer, and they
all lay prostrated at my feet.

All thair masters

Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-The Chairman,
John Wright,
WITNESS :-James Allinsoh then got up, and
moved that the question be left open, atid let the
meeting decide whether or not, their wages,
The JUDGE :-Whether or not their wages!
-Was that all he said? Witness :'- Their
wages or the Charter.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-O no!
The JUDGE :-Was that all he said? Witness :--I don't know, my Lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Who spoke next?
A person named Brown. What did he say ?
He advised them to stick out till they had their

were then willing to give them their prices but
one of the Anti-corn-law League, of the name
of Bayley, of Stalybridge. In the course of the
last three weeks, I have addressed upwards of
300,000 in different narts of Lancashire and
Cheshire. We then went to Droylsden and Manchester, and the people of Droylsden swore by
the God of heaven they would not work any
more until they had got their price of 1840.
They then came to Stockport, and caused all
the mills to be stopped. You did not turn out
as my friend here stated."
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Is it and or asjust read that again, if you please.

wages and their rights; and abide by the question, and not meddle with any other subject, for
if the did they would lose all their support.

The JUDGE :-[To Sir Gregory Lewin]Have you got a copy of this ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, let me suggest to

the witness to read over what he has, and then
to hand it to your Lordship.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
do not wish to hand any paper to your lordship
of which the defendant has not a copy.
Mr. DUNDAS :-The shortest way will be
for your lordship to take it down in the end.
WITNESS proceeded :-" It was the Ashton
lads that turned you out; and mind one thing, if you
do go in, they will come over and give you a d-d
good hiding. They then went to the bastile; but
I did not consider that right; but this winter we
may all become thieves, and then the soldiers and
police will have to look after us; and that will eat
up the system, as there are more ways than one
of eating up the system; but, if the Ashton lads
had not been there, they would not have known
that there had been such a place. The magistrates ought to have looked over such a trifling
thing as that, and not have committed some to
Chester." He said he had been in all parts of
South Lancashire, and at Burnley, Chorley, Bolton, Preston, Colne, Padiham, Clitheroe, Todmorden, Blackburn. The two Tory members of
Blackburn was a-gate of working patent looms at
1d. per cut less than any other masters were
giving in that neighbourhood, and stopped 9d. per
week for everyloom. He then went toTodmorden, and the worthy member for Oldham was actually giving more wages for some kinds of work
than what they were turned out for; and when the
authorities and soldiers went to him to protect his
factory, he told them he could do without them,
as the arms of the people were his protection; and
when that ceased, he hoped he should cease to
live. He then said, " There's that d-d rascal of
a Marshall-"
The JUDGE:-Of a Marshall?-Is that the
name? Yes, my lord. There is a manufacturer
of that name at Stockport-" and that d - d bloodhound of a thief of a Jem Bradshaw; they are
both particular friends of mine, and I love them
well, and they know it. But you must be sure
and stick out, and not go to your work; for, if
you do, the masters will crush you down, you
may depend upon it, and then the Ashton lads
will come over again, and give you a d-d good
hiding; and don't you deserve it ?" The crowd
He said, " But you willnot get off
said, "Yes."
as you did before. Now that is intimidation; but
1 know the law of conspiracy, and there never yet
was a good thing got, but some one had to suffer
for it. But they may put me in prison, for I don't
care a d-n for being within the prison of the
walls-"
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Or walls of the
p! ison, which ?
WITNESS:-He said prison of thewalls then.

He made a mistake. He finished by exhorting
them to stick out. He said he had a child who
was dead a short time since. I believe he said a
child, my lord, or one of the members of his family, I am not certain. When he concluded, did
any one else follow ? I am not aware there did.
sir. Well, you remained there? No, sir. Was
the meeting dispersed? They went peaceably off.
Was it adjourned, or how? I rather thinkit was
adjourned till next morning'at five o'clock.
The JUDGE :-You did not hear that ? No,
my lord. Who addressed the meeting on the
16th ? I cannot say who. You cannot say who ?
No, sir. What took place at that meeting ?Who was in the chair ? I believe it was a person
named Joseph Harrison-I cannot say now. Was
Wright there ? Yes. Well, tell us what took
place in the meeting of the 16th ? -Was there anybody appointed to anything ? There were a certain number of delegates appointed. Did you
know the names of any of the persons who were
appointed delegates? I believe there were several
meetings up and down the town to appoint the
delegates. I am asking where you were-not
where you were not. When you were present at
these meetings, did any appointment of delegates
take place ? Yes, they appointed John Wright.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Were you present? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Where was that.
At the meeting of the 16th. What was he appointed delegate to ? To the conference at Man.
chester. Where was that ? I am not certain.
When were your notes taken? Immediately after
the meeting. By whom? By a person named
Robert Swan. Were they taken in your presence ? Yes. Were they dictated by you? Yes.
Were they read over to you afterwards? Yes.
Were they correct? Yes. Have you any notes
of what took place on the 16th? No. Wright
was elected a delegate ? I believe he was. Have
you any doubt about it? I have not. Well, on
the 17th another meeting took place ? Yes. Can
you tell me what took place at the other meeting ?
Here is a note of it. Can you read it ? Yes. Well,
tell me what took place on the 17th? Win. Williamson was in the chair. He addressed the meeting, and said those delegates that had been at
Manchester would come forward, and state what
had been done. Did they come forward any of
them? Yes, sir. Who came forward? John
Wright. Well, when John Wright came forward,
what did John Wright say? "Meeting of delegates, chairman, and fellow-sufferers, I am come
back quite differentMr. MURPHY:-It might be Messrs. delegates, I think. [Witness hesitated, and appeared
unable to read the notes.]
Sir GREGORY LEWIN : - He addresses
them in those terms, " Delegates, chairman and

fellow-sufferers, I am come back quite different "
-Go on. If you cannot read it let somebody else
read it.
Mr. PART then took the notes from witness
and read them :-" John Wright addressed the
meeting :-Delegates, chairman, and fellow-sufferers, I am come back quite different to that I
expected I should have come back, but I have
not received any information. But we were put
down by the authorities. I went to Tib Street
for find the delegates, but I could not. I went
to
to Avery Street to look for them; and went to
several
other streets to look for them, but could
not find them. At last we found them, and saw
from the placards on the wall that it was dangerous for them to meet. We were admitted into
the room. There were the work-people as we
call them. There were seventeen delegates to
support wages, but the moment we entered the
room the meeting adjourned until to-morrow;
'And I could not tell
My Lord God from Tom Bell;'
but there was no delegate there for your benefit."
Mr. DUNDAS:-This is refreshing the witness's memory all the time.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He stated that it
was read over to him, and that it was correct.
Mr. DUNDAS:-He was looking round and
not attending.
The JUDGE :-Can you swear that that was
what was done at the meeting ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I want the witness to attend
while the notes are reading, in order that the
operations of his mind may be on the evidence.
WITNESS :-I can swear, my Lord, that it
is what took place.
Mr. PART proceeds:-" But the delegates
deceived them: but we waited upon them. But
go-get the Charter; go to the devil and do what
you will. But go to your work and get your
wages.
The JUDGE:-That is what John Wright
said ?
WITNESS :-Yes, my Lord.
Mr. PART :-" The meetings in Manchester
are called illegal, and this meeting is illegal; but
when you get your wages go to your work. But
in Manchester they will not go to their work
until they get the Charter. But I did not come
here to deceive you. But I believe there is a
great many that will go and creep under the gates
before this day month. We went for the wages
we came out for. For I don't care for no man,
a nether he be fool or Dick. Mr. President, I
hope that no man will go from this meeting under
any mistake. But I will not deceive you, for I
have not voted this day. But the meeting was
concluded for wages and the Charter, and both
had gone together.

The JUDGE:-Is this all that Wright said?
WITNESS:-Yes, my Lord, that is what was
said by Wright-Mr. PART continues :-" I should have been
one of the first when Sawyer and me went up
stairs. They dissolved their meeting until tomorrow, but we must look strict after them."
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Did you see any
placard of this meeting on the 17th ? I saw a large
placard. Did it say anything about gold?
Mr. DUNDAS:-I object to that question.
Sir GREGORY LEWN :-Have you got a
note about it ? I have. If you have, look at it !
I believe I have. Was that made in the same
manner as the last? Yes. A placard was read,
headed-" Run for gold." Who read it ? Aperson named Joseph Carter. Did you attend a
meeting after the 17th of August? Yes, other
meetings., Who did you see there? John Allinson was at one of them. I believe after that
some of the hands returned to work? Yes. Do
you remember a meeting on the 15th of December, at the Hall of Science? Yes, and another
on Bamber's Brow, on the 16th. Was John
Allinson at these meetings? He was. Was
Allinson a speaker ? He was. Do you remember the language he used ? Yes. Stateit.
Witness then read from his notes-" Fellow sufferers, this meeting is now at an end; and I would
advise you, who can, to go to your work. It is
useless for a few of you to be sacrificed, for I
know that some of you have better situations
than others? Did Allinson advise them to go to
their work ? Yes. Did Carter and Clarke speak ?
Yes. Did they advise them to go to theirwork ?
Clark advised them to go to their work. Did
Carter ?-Will you let me seethe paper, where
you say Allinson advised them to go to their
work? [Witness hands the paper from which he
was reading to Mr. Part.] Is that, which Allinson said, correctly stated there? Yes. Very
well, then we will see. Carter was the first
speaker after the chair was taken. He said, that
they never would obtain their rights until the
Charter became the law of the land. He had
a brother sacrificed, who would have been
living now, if he had had a fair day's wages
for a fair day's work. What signified if a few
lives were lost, if they got their rights ? The people of Switzerland would rise for their rights,
and the people here ought to contend for the
Charter, if they had to fight for it.-[The Judge
said, if he had to take down all the speeches,
there would be no end of it.] It was then agreed,
that Mr. Part, should read the remainder of
Allinson's speech, which he did as follows:-"We,
up to the last night, left the Charter; and it was
was a wages question altogether; but, as that has
failed, we must now go back to these principles,

which alone can save us from ruin and degradation, by using every means in our power to obtain
the people's Charter.
The JUDGE:-The substance of that is, that
the struggle is now over; he advises them to resume their work, but, still to struggle for the
Charter. I infer that he went for the wages
question, rather than for the Charter. He says
he has gone to endure great privations in the
cause; advises them to resume work, and to use
every means in their power to get the Charter.[The examination of the witness was then
resumed:]-You say you heard a placard read;
was it like that ? [Handing it to witness.] Yes,
it was similar to this. The placard, of which the
tollowing is a copy, was then read :-"Run for
gold! Labour is suspended; public credit is
shaken; paper is worthless; run for gold!
Every sovereign is now worth 30s. Paper cannot be cashed. Run, middle-class-men, trades,
odd-fellows, sick clubs, money clubs, to the savings' banks, and allbanks for gold, gold, gold!!!"
Was there any other placard read at that meeting ? There was.-Look at that.-(The Executive
placard). Was it like that ? I believe it was similar to that.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I merely
now prove, my Lord, that the executive address
was used at that meeting.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS:-How
long have you been in the police ? Seven years,
on the 12th of August next. Who is your friend
Robert Wright ? Robert Wright, sir! Yes, is
not he the man that wrote for you ?-Who wrote
for you ? Ben Norfolk, wrote at first. Have you
got him here with you ? No.

Have you got the

second, and who his he? Robert Swan. And
the third? Yes. Well, you have not brought
him with you ? I have not, sir. Are they all
happy at home ? I believe they are very well.
Can you write yourself, or can you only read
Swan's hand-writing? O, I can both read and
write, sir. Anything written with a swan's
quill, I suppose ? Yes, something with a pen.
But you are a bad craftsman; yet you have a
monstrous good memory, Abraham. Well, I
have a good memory. How long did it take you
to dictate those notes to Ben? Well, I should
say we were three-quarters of an hour, or an
hour. A tidy memory that, Abraham. Can you
carry a speech in your head so as to dictate it
again? I can. How long do you carry before
you deliver? That depends on convenience.
Do you always keep it in your head as long as
that ? I have some other things to think of,
sometimes. Do you presume to say, that, what
you told to Ben, was exactly what passed? It
was, but it was not all there. But it took threequarters of an hour to tell it.-How long was the

man speaking ?-How long for instance was Pilling speaking ? I did not take notes. O, but
you can tell us -that
you need not take
down.-Can't you tell us ? I cannot exactly.
I did not ask you to tell us exactly. It might be
half an hour. I think he was speaking about that
time. And did you dictate that to Ben what Pilling said? I did afterwards.
Have you
been in the habit of carrying things in your head
this way? 0, I have attended several meetings
and given them to Swan and others. You can
do that at a fetch ?-How long a speech could you
carry in your mind ?-Suppose you heard a speech
for half an hour, could you carry it ? Some part
of it. Twice as much as that of Pilling's ? That
depends on the subject. Suppose it was all about
wages and the Charter, could you carry it if it
occupied an hour in the delivery ? I think I could,
sir. What is this Robert Swan? He is a sheriff's
officer. What aged man is he ? I should think
he is about forty-five or forty. What has he to
do with you ? He was employed as special constable during the disturbances. That was the
only thing he had to do with you ? It was. When
he had written down speeches before for you, was
he employed as special constable? He never did
write a speech till the late outbreak.
Then,
before last year, you never did write speeches ?
Yes. Then who wrote those for you? Our own
officers. Before this year (1842)? Yes. O, I
beg pardon, I thought you had him. Can you
tell me whether John Allinson was a turn-out ?
I cannot. What was he to trade? A weaver.
And what was this man Wright that you have
been telling us of? He formerly was a spinner
but he was out then, and was working on th
road under the relief committee. He was not ii
any business of his own? He was not; he was
employed as a pauper. Were the people, generally, who attended the meeting, " turn-outs" ?
I should say they were. When you went to the
meeting did you expect to find it a turn-out
meeting ?
The JUDGE :-What meeting? My Lord, on
the 15th there was a great meeting, consisting of
5000 or 6000 people. [To witness.] When you
went there you expected to find a meeting of
"turn-outs" ? I did, sir. And was there much
said about wages ? There was. Did the peoplf
listen attentively when anything was said aboti
wages ? I took more notice of the speakers tha,
the people. Ay, but you would observe as well?
I was thinking of what was said. Did you look
up, or to the mob ? I looked at the speakers I
Could not you observe whether the peopli

were attentive ? I took very little notice ex
cept of the speakers. Very well, have you tolL
us now of all the persons you know who attend-

ed that meeting? I have. Can you tel ts any

58
more of the speakers-of the turn-out people that
were there ? You can't? Yes, I can. A person
named Beattie was there for instance. Was he a
working man? He was a steam-loom weaver,
and out of work at the time. A person named
Heywood, and a man named Webb, were there.
Were many of the mills in that neighbourhood
stopped? They were all stopped on the 16th, sir.
Did this great meeting of j000 or 6000 persons
disperse quietly ?
disperse quietly?
The JUDGE :-The meeting on the 15th.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Yes, my Lord. (To
itness)-Did the meeting on the 16th disperse
quietly ? Yes, it did, sir.
Mr. MURPHY :--I don't ask you anything.
Mr. Mc OUBREY :-I want to see an example
of this most extraordinary memory of yoursyou say you can remember a speech of half an
hour's length ? A part of it. O, 1 thought you
could remember it so as to dictate it again ? I said
a great deal would depend on the subject. Just
try if you can remember what is written down
here; see if you can repeat what my learned
friend said ? He has been asking me if a meeting would disperse quietly. As to the first thing
he said ? He wanted to know if I took notes
at the time. Well, did not you ? No; I dictated to Ben. Norfolk, who wrote them down.
Ay, but can you repeat the first'question put to
you? That was the first. What was the next ?
If it was the original, and whether I had another, and about whether he had got pens, ink,
and paper, and so on. Do you swear that these
are the questions he put to you? Yes. Are
these the very words ? Well, it is the question
he asked.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Well,
I have a few questions to ask you, but I will not
test your memory so far as my learned friend.
I am sure you could remember Mr. Pilling's
sneech? Not all. Not what is down in your
notes! Could you give us word for word as it
is down in your notes ? I believe I could. Have
you travelled far ? No. Well, you followed
Pilling through a very long tour-through South
Lancashire-through twenty-five, thirty, or forty
towns? Not so many. Are you a politician?
Not much of a one. You do not read the newspapers? O, I do. Do you read the Manchester
Guardian? Occasionally. Do you think there
is any striking similarity between the speech
you reported for Pilling, and the speech of Pilling
as reported in the Manchester Guardian I
?
never read Pilling's speech in the Guardian.

Upon your oath ? Upon my oaca. Now, when
dictating to Robert, did he refresh your memory
at all ? He did, occasionally. Then these were
your notes, and Robert's together ? Yes. And
where is Robert? He is not here. And why
is he not here? I cannot answer that. Don't
you think he ought to be here as well as youryou think he ought to be here as well as yourself ?-They are your joint notes.Now, when
IPilling heard at the meeting on the 16th that
Witness:
they had been at the workhouseThat is the 15th, sir. Did not Pilling reprimand
the work-people for that act ? He said it was
very wrong. I think you said Wright took the
chair on the 15th of August, and that Newton
was the first man who addressed the meeting
after Wright opened it. Newton told them that
they should go to the Duke of Wellington's,
Buckingham Palace, the Lords, and the Conmons, or the top shop ? Yes. Did he say (on
your oath) that if the Corn-laws were not repealed he would turn London upside down ? He
said a number of things that I cannot recollect.
Did he say that, or words to that effect ? I cannot say. Did the meeting hiss Newton when
he said he would go to London ? Yes. What
is Newton? A stonemason. Is he a master?
Yes. Has he three, four, five, six, seven, or
eight men employed occasionally? Yes, or a
dozen, if he has a job. I believe he sometimes
employs twenty ? I cannot answer that. Have
you ever known him to employ twenty men?
The JUDGE :-Mr. O'Connor, I cannot take
down the questions, in consequence of your rapidity.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I asked him, my Lord, if
he were a master stonemason, and, occasionally,
in the habit of employing twenty men ?
The JUDGE :-A master stonemason ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Yes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-And sometimes employs a
number of men?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Yes, my Lord. To the
witness)-How soon did you give information
of this meeting to the magistrates ? After the
meeting was over, the notes were written, and I
gave them immediately after to the magistrates,
and to the superintendant. The same notes that
were produced to-day? Yes. Did you appear
as a witness before the magistrates, when Pilling
was committed? No. Did you appear at any
time before the magistrates ? Yes. Was Newton
brought before the magistrates? No. Was he
ever arrested for that meeting? Not that I am
aware of. Are you not aware that he was not I

59
He was not. Did the chairman tell Newton,
when he talked of sacking London, that he (the
chairman) would not go to London ?-Did he
advise the people not to go ? He did.
The JUDGE :-You say, "when he told
them to go and sack London,"-He did not say
that.
is pretty much the
Mr. O'CONNOR :-It
same thing, my Lord:-to fight the Duke of
Wellington, &c. (To the witness) Wright was
a turn-out ? He was under the relief committee,
working on the roads.
The JUDGE:-What is the relief committee ?
A fund sent down to the manufacturing districts for the purpose of giving employment to
certain old men who were out of work, at nine
shillings a week; and the relief committee had
the management of the fund.
The JUDGE :-Some private fund? Yes, my
Lord. A number of private gentlemen were
appointed as a committee to have the management of it.
Mr. O'CONNOR:--Besides these marks of
disapprobation when Newton recommended them
to go to London, did the meeting charge him
with being a tool in the hands of the Anti-cornlaw League? I recollect one or two individuals
shouted out, " Newton, you are a tool in the
hands of the Anti-corn-law League," or something that way. That was when he was recommending them to go to London. Did the meeting charge him with being sent there by the
masters to create the disturbance ?-Now, on
your oath, is that the case, or not ? I believe it
is. Is that in your journal? Sir. Have you
written that down in your notes? No. What
then did you collect evidence for ? Of what I
could think at the time. To lay before the magistrates ? To go to the superintendant. Do you
think it was a part of your duty to put the magistrates in possession of the acts of men creating
an outbreak ? I was sent there to make a faithful
report of the meeting. You can recollect now
what Newton said, and why not put it down at
the time ?-Was not that an important feature ?
But I did not think at the time that it was important. You did not think it important for a
man to be sent among thousands of irritated
individuals to create a disturbance ?-When did
you see that placard about running for gold ? I
believe it was on the 17th; I will not be certain.
Now, sir, did you attend a meeting of any party
about the 15th or 16th, where the following
resolution was passed:-" That this meeting

being convinced that the government has no in.
tention of affording effectual relief for the acknowledged distresses of the people, hereby
avow the solemn determination never again to
pass, or to retainfor twenty-four hours without
exchanging for gold any Bank of England notes,
until, by the total and immediate repeal of the
corn laws, Parliament shews its willingness to
commence a real redress of our grievances ?" I
never saw it in print, nor placarded on the walls.
Did you see a placard for weeks on the walls of
Stockport, headed " Murder, murder, murder !"
I did, I believe. Do you remember the printer's
name ? No. Did you read it ?-Is it your duty
to collect such information through placards,
and lay it before the magistrates ? Yes, occasionally. What do you mean by occasionally laying
it before the magistrates ?-Did you look at the
name of the printer of any of those placards ?
Yes. Who printed them ? I do not remember.
Would you remember if your memory was refreshed ?----Would you ?-Did you see Gadsby's
name to any of them ? Upon your oath! Upon
my oath I do not remember that I did. You do
not remember hearing that resolution passed? No.
Now, on the 15th of September, Allinson recommended the people, the struggle having ceased
to return to their work, but to look forward to
the Charter; was not that what he said? It
was, sir. Now, did not Allinson recommend the
people to have recourse to all peaceable, legal,
and constitutional means to acquire the Charter?
-on your oath ! I cannot remember whether
he did so legally or constitutionally. Dick he so
peaceably ? I believe he did so peaceably. You
remember when Pilling complained that he had
lost a child within a fortnight, that he said the7
should return to their work because Bayley's
men had disappointed them?--You remember
he told them there was no use in holding out
any longer ? No, sir, I do not.
The JUDGE :-He did not say so.
Mr. O'CONNOR :--One of the speakers said
he did not care a farthing for "fool or Dick"Now, did you hear any drums or fifes during the
disturbances ?-Are not meetings often called
in Stockport and Oldham by drums and fifes ? I
know nothing about Oldham. Don't youknow that
meetings are often called at Oldham by drum
and fife ?-Pilling, for instance, said he would
go to Oldham and drum them? I am certain
that Pilling used the word "drub" and not
"drum," when he talked of going to Oldham.
Now, instead of fool or Dick, was it not "Iloole"

60
or " Dick," he said, alluding to Holland Hoole
and Richard Cobden?
The JUDGE :-Hoole or Dick?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes, my Lord; thereby
meaning Holland Hloole, a magistrate, and
Richard Cobden, who is generally known by the
name "Dick" at those public meetings.
WITNESS:-I don't know. Now, sir, all t
his long narrative of yours, through which you
fave followed Pilling up to the 16th of August, the
question was a wages question. le was speaking of his distresses, and complaining that he was
turned out, and in a state of starvation. I do
not remember that Pilling said he was in distress. Do not your notes say so? Not of his
being in distress. Does he not say that he was
,hecause of calling the meeting, because he was
urned out ? No. Are you not aware that he
Tas turned out of Platt's mill? No. On the 16th
and 17th, Stockport was much excited? It was.
At what time did the excitement begin to subide ? About the latter end of August. And it
egan to get quieter every day after that till the

men returned to their work ? There were meeti gs every day. But unattended with violence ?
Yes. Now, did not you know of more excited
meetings in Stockport than in any other town
in the neighbourhood ?--IHad there not been very
angry discussions there between the people called
Chartists and the Anti-corn-law League? Yes.
The JUDGE :-In public? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Are you not aware from
your own knowledge that, when a discussion is
announced to take place, the Chartists send to
various parts of the country for their best lecturers? I remember a meeting of the Bible
Society which the Chartists came and opposed.
Did you ever hear of the Chartists upsetting a
meeting of the Anti-corn-law League ? I have
not been at such meetings. Were you at
the Bible Society meeting ? Yes. Did you help
to upset it ? No. You set it up, I suppose. Have
you not seen invitations to parties to take part
in these discussions? I have seen Doyle invited
to a discussion. Are you not aware that a bad
feeling exists amoug these parties ? It seems you
only attended those meetings on the 15th and
16th of August ? I was sent to them. And did you
hear Pilling say that it was a sad thing, that, in
consequence of his distressed state, and being
turned out of work, he had nothing to bury his
child with ? I don't remember that. Now, sir,
you saw placards on the wall; did you ever see
in Stockport a printed paper purporting to be a

recommendation of the Mayor of Stockport to
the people, to go and help themselves if the
government did not give them any remedy for
their distresses? I don't know. You have been
seven years in Stockport, and I ask you, did you,
or did you not hear it ? I never read a placard
to that effect on the walls. Did you see it in a
paper, or small hand-bill ? No. Are you sure
of that? I am, that I never saw it on a paper.
Are you sure you never did? I am not certain.That
is right, I thought you would not be certain. You
are sure you did not, but you are not certain whether you did or not ? I am not certain whether I
did or not. When Wright returned he told the
meeting of those who appointed him a delegate
that the delegates were dispersed and sent about
their business by the authorities of Manchester ?
Yes.
Mr. MURPHY :-My Lord, Pilling has requested me to ask, whether or not, in the whole
course of their discussions he had not recommended the wage question ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I do not know if Pilling is
aware that he may ask questions himself ?
The JUDGE :-Certainly. Do you wish to
ask the witness whether you ever recommended
anything else?
PILLING :-My Lord, the constable and I
have been together on a committee for years for
the ten hours' bill; we are chums. (Laughter.)
The JUDGE :-Did Pilling, at these meetings, ever speak about anything else but wages ?
O yes, he was one of those that were sent fc.
trial at Chester.
The JUDGE :--We don't want to hear that.
Did he ever speak about anything but the wages
question ? Yes.
Mr. MURPHY :-I should wish him to be
asked, whether this man, Pilling, was not a
chum of his ?
The JUDGE :-I do not like to say I won't
ask it; but one does not see where a question
of this sort may tend. The question about the
ten hours' bill, how can that affect the one
before us ?
Mr. MURPHY:-The imputation is, that this
man, Pilling, was at those meetings, for the
purpose of promoting disaffection on the Chartist
question. Now, Pilling, by the testimony of the
witness, was a person who exhorted them to
consider the wage question only. If, in addition
to that, it would appear that he was always busy
on the wage question, it would give a favourable
impression to the jury.

61
The JUDGE:--Was Pilling long anxious
about the wage question ? I am not aware of
that; but, in 1839, he was agitating for the
Charter very much, my Lord. He says he was
a chum of yours when endeavouring to get a
bill before Parliament for ten hours' work ? I
do not know that ever I sat on committee with
him during my life. Were you a chum with
him ? Never, my Lord. Explain yourself a
little more-What do you mean by a chum ?Where is Pilling?
PILLING :-Here, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-He says he never was a chum
with you.
PILLING:-My Lord, I was anxious to get
a ten hours' bill; a committee was appointed;
I was one of that committee, and we chose him
as another.
WITNESS :-With regard to that, my Lord,
I was working at a mill some years ago, and I
took, twice, some money from the rest of the
men to the committee, but I did not stop, my
Lord.
The JUDGE :-You were subscribing money
to carry out the object of the ten hours' bill ?When was that ? It would be about 1834, or
1835, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
may here state, that I have undertaken to call
a witness named Wilcox, and it has been intimated to me by Mr. O'Connor, that, if he be
will be there
called, there called, no occasion to trouble Sir
ilundertaking
James Graham further. I state this in the hear-

JOHN ROBINSON SCOTT examined by Mr.
HILDYARD :-Did you attend a meeting at
Royton, on Saturday evening, the 13th of
August ? Yes. Was there a person of the name
of Augustus Frederick Taylor there? Yes. Did
the meeting choose a chairman ? Yes. Was
any question raised as to what should be the object of the meeting ? Thomas Radcliffe got into
a cart and opposed them. He asked them if
that meeting were met to discuss politics, or the
wage question? How was that question received by the meeting ? They hissed him. This
is a note I took at the meeting at the time.
[Producing it.] In whose handwriting is that ?
In my own. Was there a person named Hoyle
there ?
The JUDGE:-Is he a defendant ?
Mr. HILDYARD:-Hoyle is not a defendant,
my Lord, what he spoke was in the presence of
Taylor, who is a defendant. [To witness.] Whet
did he say ? Ie said he was proud to see me
come forward in my proper clothing; and that
if I came as a spy he would strip me, and send
me about my business.
The JUDGE :-You were in your police dress
then ? Yes, soy Lord.
Mr. HILDYARD:--Did Taylor address the
meeting ? He did. Can you state what the circumstances of that address was ? He addressed
the meeting first about the government in a very
savage manner, and he damned the villainous
system. He said, " If I was the principal in this

ing of all the defendants,
The JUDGE :-Is there any other defendant,
not defended by Counsel, who would wish to
examine Sir James Graham ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I believe, my Lord, there
is not, and I trust Sir James Graham will find,
that it has been with no idle purpose that he
has been subpoenaed here to-day. It was by no
wish to put Sir James Graham to any inconvenience ; but we have been requiring the attendance of another witness, and, as he is to appear,
we do not wish to detain the Right Honourable
Secretary.Charter.
y.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-That there
SecrThe

damned infernal place before this day six week's."
Was that meeting adjourned till the Monday
following ? It was, sir. A meeting assembled on
the Monday following at Royton. About what
hour? Half-past six in the morning.
Mr. DUNDAS:-What day?
Mr. HILDYARD:--Monday the 15th. [To
witness.] Did the same person (Radcliffe), who,
on Saturday evening, raised the question as to the
object of the meeting, raise the question again
on Monday morning? He did. Tell us shortly
what he said? He said we would never gain the
(Taylor also was present.) They had
better do without their meetings; the proclamation had come out that morning, and they were
acting on dangerous principles. The placard had
appeared that morning on the walls of Rovton.
Did Taylor reply to Radcliffe when he made that
remark ? He did. What did Taylor say ? He
hoped the meetings would not be done away wth,
for they might be got up with the consent of the
authorities and constables. Was it proposed at
that meeting to send delegates to Manchester ?

may be no mistake about it, I state the name of
the witness. It is James Wilcox, whom I undertake to call in proper time. Then, my Lord, it is
munderstood that Sir James Graham may retire.
The JUDGE :-O yes.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM bowed his acknowledgment of the favour, and shortly afterwards left
the Court.

I would never rest till I was at the
top of the tree, and would scale the walls of that

62
It was ? Who was proposed to be sent as a
delegate ? Taylor was proposed and elected. After
that was carried, was any motion put to the meeting respecting the Charter? Yes. It was moved
for the Charter, and nothing but the Charter, by
a man named Ogden. Was Taylor then present?
Yes. Did you and Taylor attend the meeting on
the 16th of August ? Yes. At Royton ? Yes. Did
Taylor make any communication to the meeting ?
Yes. What was it? He said, " My friends, I can
give you no satisfaction this morning, as nothing
was done in Manchester yesterday." He thought
something would be done that day (the 16th), and
it was for them to consider whether they would

magistrate, entered the room (Carpenters' Hall),
and told us our meeting was illegal, on account
of the out-door pressure; and our chairman refused to break up the meeting. They instantly
left the room; they allowed us 10 minutes to disperse, and no decision was come to at that time;
for, first-one nibbled, then another, but none
would take hold. But I fearlessly tell you, that
I took hold of the grand question, to stand
for the Charter, which met with loud applause."
The JUDGE :-Received with loud applauseat
the meeting of delegates ?
Mr HIL

send a delegate to Manchester or not. Upon
that, was the account of the funds of the committee
read to the meeting? Yes, sir. After that had
been done, was any motion made ? Yes. Now,
what was the motion ? Ogden moved that Taylor
should go to Manchester as a delegate, and they
entered into a collection on the ground. Do you
know what money was raised ? Five shillings were
collected in a hat, and the sum was announced to
the meeting. What was done with the money received in the hat ? It was handed over to Booth,
the secretary. Was that meeting adjourned to the
following morning?Yes. Did you attend a meeting
on the 17th ? Yes.Was Taylor again present ? He
was. This is Augustus Frederick Taylor, of whom
you are speaking ? Yes. Now, uporn the morning
of the 17th, was anything said as to what should
be done by those persons who had money in clubs,
or savings' banks ? They advised them to draw it
out immediately. Who advised them to do that ?
William Booth. He said he did not know how
things were standing, but he hoped they were
standing for the Charter. Hoyle said, that, at

"We had then only five minutes to disperse, and
we have a considerable portion of the work to be
done to-day; and I consider that you have no
time to lose."
Mr. DUNDAS :-Who said this ?
Mr.HILDYARD :-Taylor said this at the
meeting of delegates at Manchester.
WITNESS proceeds :-" There is a considerableportion of the work to be done to-day, and if
you wish to have a hand in this undertaking, you
must say something this morning; you have not a
moment to lose, for the men must use the sword,
know where to direct them."
and the women will
Did he say what a delegate from Birmingham had
done after the delegates had come to that resolution ? Yes; "As soon as the delegate from Birmingham had got the decision, away he runs to
the train to take the news, and, doubtless, they
would come forward in thousands to join our
ranks, and before this day week there will not be
one trade at work; but I fearlessly tell you that
I was the man that grappled the Charter at Manchester yesterday, and I would like to witness a

Manchester yesterday, there was a majority of bloodyrevolution,"or resolution, I knownot which
Mr. O'CONNOR :-A bloody revolution!
200 delegates for the Charter, and 50 against it.
He explained different points of the Charter, and

Mr. HILDYARD :-After that was it moved

said what a benefit they would receive if they could
represent Frederick Taylor, and send him as a
member to Parliament. Did he make mention of
what occurred at Huddersfield ?Yes. He said the
magistrates of Huddersfield had made the soldiers
drunk; sent them out after the mob to fire upon
them and butcher them up. Did Taylor address
the meeting ? Yes. What did he say ? He said
"Ladies and gentlemen, we have arrived at one
of the most important subjects ever brought out
to the public. There was a resolution passed in
Manchester, on Monday last, for the Charter to
become the law of the land; and no doubt but
something serious will take place before long.
He understood that the magistrates were sitting
all day at the New Bailey Court House (Salford);
and, about four o'clock in the afternoon, Mr
Beswick, one of the Manchester police, and a

that Taylor should go again, asa delegate, to Manchester, to attend a meeting? Yes. On the morning of the 18th, was there another meeting ? Yes.
Was Taylor at that meeting ? Yes. Did he make
any announcement ? Yes. What did he tell them ?
He was sorry to inform them that TurnerThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-If your Lordship will allow me to suggest, this is the " Executive Address." There is another address which
shall be produced. I do not wish your Lordship
to be astray by-and-by.
Mr. HILDYARD:-(To the Witness) Go on
to the conclusion. "He stated that Turner, of
Manchester, was taken; his press and all his
furniture; and whatever may be the event of
think we have ta sli
he ghtest chance we wil go
forward. But it appeared to me that some of
the people were tired, and wished to return to

63
their labour.

But if you do you will leave me How were they walking ? They came in a body.

in a most dangerous position. But I know I
can only have imprisonment; there is already a
great many taken, and if I be taken, I shall be
only one among the rest." After he concluded
speaking, was it again moved that he be sent a
delegate to Manchester? It was. That was on
the 18th ? It was.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Taylor
was elected on the 15th to go to Manchester on
the 16th. Yes. And he returned on the 16th,
and told them that the meeting was dispersed
by the magistrates ? Yes. On the 18th, he told
them he was a delegate again to Manchester;
and on that occasion he learned that the people
were tired out, and wished to return to work.
That was the report of his delegation of the
17th ?-He learned that the people were tired
out, and wished to return to work? I did not
take it in that light; I took it that the Royton
people were tired. Was not he giving an account
of his mission ?-Did you not say that that was
what he learned in Manchester ? He said the
people were tired, and if you go to work you
will leave me in a most dangerous position. Did
not he say that on the 16th the delegates divided,
and that there was a majority of 200 for the
Charter, and 50 against it ?-You have read a
great deal out of that paper-will you let me

Were they walking in any order or not? In
about eight or ten a-breast. Had they anything
with them in their hands? They had. What ?
Sticks of various sizes, large and small. In
what direction were they coming? They entered
Bacup on the Rochdale-road. Did you follow
those persons to Bacup, so as to see what they
did. I did, sir. What did they do? They
proceeded to different mills, and stopped them.
Did you see the hands come out of anywhere ?
I saw some of them. What was said among the
mob of people when they came to a mill? I
did not exactly hear. Was there any cry among
them ? Yes; that they should stop the mills.
They always say that in a perfectly still tone of
voice ? No, sir, in a rather menacing way.
The JUDGE :-They called out to the persons in the mill, in a menacing way, that they
should come out ? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Did they make any use of
their sticks ? No, but they brandished them as
How many
they passed through the town.
mills did you see stop that day ? Three or four.
Do you know all the mills in Bacup were stopped

that day ? They were all stopped;-about
twenty in number. How long was it after the
mob entered the town that the mills were
stopped ? About half an hour afterwards. After
the mills were stopped what did the mob do ?
it
see ?
divided into small parties of from three
:-He is not speaking about de- They
The JUDGE
to twenty. What did these parties of people
legates, but about the people. " Some wish to
do ? They went in different directions demandgo back; but if you do, you will leave me in a
ing provisions, and entered all houses they
most dangerous position."
from
Mr. O'CONNOR:-He was telling them, my found open, and took them (the provisions)
what he had learned as a delegate, and the inmates. Did you see them get anything,
Lord,
that if the people of Royton left him, they anywhere yourself ?-Just do mention what you
saw in any one instance ? There was a grocer
would leave him in a dangerous position.
been handed to named Carter, and the mob got about his doors
The JUDGE :-A letter has
and
me from somebody of the name of Philips, re- and tried to force themselves in; and bread
to remain in Court. IlIe cheese, and other things were thrown out to
questing permission
about Carsays he is brought here as a witness, and asks them. Hiow many people were there
leave to remain in Court on the ground that he ter's ? About fifty. Was their conduct violent ?
No. Did they use any threats ? I heard none.
is a reporter.
The JUDGE :-Did they ask for the provisions?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- He speaks
report, my Lord, and there- I did not hear them. Why did you say they
to facts beyond his
went about demanding provisions ? I saw there
fore must submit to the rule.
FARADAY, examined by Mr. going to doors that were locked, and heard them
SILVESTER
A constable. threatening to break them open if provisions
POLLOCK:-What are you?
no
Were you at Bacup on the 12th of August ? I were not given them. At Carter's, I heard
was. Do you remember seeing people coming threats.
Mr. POLLOCK :-What was the general
into the town ? Yes. What time did they come ?
in the morning. state of the town at Bacup during the rest of
Between nine and ten o'clock
much excited.
How many were there? About two thousand. the day ? It was very

64
The JUDGE :-The whole of the town ? The
whole, my Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK:-Did ever you see a placard
like that [handing witness the Executive placard]
posted up in Bacup ? I did. When? On Saturday, the 20th of August.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS:-Now,
policeman, did you see the mob demand anything, or get anything but provisions ;-bread
and cheese ? No.
Cross-examined by Mr. McOUBREY:-Did
you read that placard that was shewn to you ?
Not all through: it is the same. How much
of it did you read ? I satisfied myself that it was
the same. How much of it did you read ? One
or two lines. And you swear, from reading one
or two lines besides the heading, that you are
sure it is the same ? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-You
saw three or four mills stopped, yourself; and
twenty were stopped altogether. Are all the
mg.sters that owned these mills dead ? No, they
are still alive. And is there none of them to
come and speak of the stoppage of their mills
but yourself? No. At any of those mills that
were stopped, did you see any one shewing the
men how to take the plugs out ? No. Then, in
fact, you do not know any person that stopped
them? Not individually. You do not know
"ny one, and the masters are all dead ?
Cross-examined by WILLIAM BEESLEY :I would ask him, my Lord, in what part of
Bacup he saw the placard published ? At the
corner of St. James's Street, corner of New
Church Road. You said you saw and heard the
people go round demanding provisions of the
shopkeepers; now, did you find any of these
provisions on any of the people who were there?
No. Was there any found in the police station?
No. Did you hear tell of a load of meal, which
was taken from a grocer, being found at the
police office ? No, not then. Did you hear of it
afterwards? Yes, I will explain if I am allowed.
The JUDGE :-No, you must not explain.
WILLIAM BEESLEY :-I want an answer
to the question.
WITNESS :-It occurred before. I was not

Exectutive placard] did you see that posted in
Rochdale? Yes, I saw it p sted on the 17th.
When did the hands turn out? On the 11th.
Do you remember the Queen's proclamation
being posted in Rochdale ? I do, sir. What day
did thit appear ? On Monday the 15th. Just
tell me how far is Manchester from Rochdale ?
Twelve miles.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-About
what time did the people begin to return to
their work? or, how long, in other words, did
they remain out ? They returned in the middle
of the following week, about the 20th.
JAMES BUCKLEY examined by the AT
TORNE Y-GENERAL :-Where do you live
In Stalybridge. Did you live there in Augus
last ? Yes. Were you at a meeting on the 7t1
of August, last year ? Yes. Where did it take
place? On Wedensough Green. Is that the
place they sometimes call Mottram Moor? Yes
What time did you get there? A little after two
o'clock. About how many people do you think
you found there? 3000 or 4000. Was there
any place for the people to speak to the meetin:
from ?-A platform, waggon, cart, or anything
of that sort ? There was either a cart or a waggon. What were they doing when you wen
first there ? They were singing.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-This was
Sunday, the 7th of August, my Lord. (To witness.) Who was in the Chair? Win. Muirhouse
Do you recollect anything he said to the meeting.
He said he had a resolution. What was the resolution ? That the people of England were to
give over work till such time as they got a fair
day's wages for a fair day's work, and the Charter
became the law of the land. Did he introduce
anybody to the meeting? Yes. Who? He introduced Leach. Do you know him? I never saw
Have youhim
Yes. I have onlay. seentwice. Do you see

mnBacup then. You are not one of the parties
that broke into the house for that purpose ? No,
I know nothing of it.
WILLIAM BENTLEY examined by Mr.
POLLOCK :-What are you? I am one of the
county police. Do you come from Rochdale? I
do, sir Look at this; [handing witness the

ing Do you remember his Christian name?
John Crossley. Do you remember Stephenson?
Yes. What was his Christian name? WM.
Stephenson. Did he speak? Yes. Did you know
either Crossley or Stephenson before ? No. I
saw them often since. You know that the per
sons who spoke there bore the names of Stephen
son and Crossley ? Yes. Do you know whit

him in Court now ?-0,I understand he is not
here. I do not know whether he is here or not.
Was his Christian name mentioned? Yes: John
Leach. Was it said where he came from ? From
Hyde. Did he speak for some time ? Yes. Do
you remember another man who spoke ? Yes;
there was a man of the name of Crossley speak-

65
they live? Yes, in Stalybridge. What part did
they take in the discussion or speaking ?-Did
they speak for the resolution or against it; or
about something else? Why Leach began, and
I don't want a
the church bell was ringinglong story about what he said-tell me, generally,
whether they supported or passed the resolution?
They supported the resolution.
The JUDGE:-All three ?-Yes, my Lord.
you
The ATTORNEY -GENERAL: -Do
know a person named John Wilde ?-No, Robert
Wilde ? Yes
The JUDGE :-Is he a defendant?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-He is not
here now, my Lord, he is in confinement. On
the neXt day, the 8th of August, on Monday
morning, was there a meeting ? I did not attend
any meeting then. Did you see any number of
persons collected in the streets ? Yes, a great
many. In Stalybridge? Yes. Had they anything in their hands generally ? Sticks, a good
many of them. Were there more with sticks or
without, or the other way? There were more
without sticks. Very good. Now, did you follow
them to any particular place or mill ? I went
down to Mr. Harrison's with them. About how
many do you suppose went there? There was not
so many when I got there, but when the whole
mob came there were many a thousand. This
was on the eighth. Did you hear any noise ? Yes,
a cry of" turn them out-turn them out." And
what was the effect of that? Why they did turn
them out.
The JUDGE :--Did the mob go on? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-And what
else? The mob ordered the mill to be stopped,
and the hands to be turned out. Now, did they
afterwards go to Messrs. Lees's? Yes, they went
to Mr. Lees's after that. How far is Lees's from
Harrison's? Not twenty yards; just at the entrance of the gates. Were you at Lees's yourself ? Yes. What did the mob do there? They
demanded admittance, but they could not get in.
Were the gates open or shut? They were shut,
but they broke them open. They broke a plank
off the gate from the top to the bottom, and then
they got in; and they turned the hands out at
another door. Where did they go after this ?
To Duckinfield. On their way did they interfere
with any other mills ? They stopped all the
mills that they came near. Now, did you
follow them to Duckinfield?
Yes.
How
far is Duckinfield from the place where you
started ? Why it is short of a mile. Where did
they go from Duckinfield? To Ashton. On
their way from Duckinfield to Ashton did they
stop any more mills? They stopped all the mills
they came -ear.
But were there any mills

between Duckinfield ann Ashton? Yes, there are
several mills on the road-side. Did they stop
them all? Yes. Did they create any alarm ?
Yes, they ran from place to place shouting and
brandishing their sticks. What I want to know
is, was their appearance such as to create alarm?

ton ? About a mile. Is it a portion of Ashton ?
It is adjoining it Did they stop any mills there ?
Yes. Now, can you give me any notion how
many mills you saw stopped in the course of
that day by the mob going about in this manner ?
How many I saw? Ay. Well, I did not see them
stop any mills in Ashton or Duckinfield. They
were stopped before I got up to them. Did you
go with the mob, or did you follow after them ?
I went with the mob sometimes, and sometimes
they went before me. How many mills were
stopped in the course of that day ? They were
all stopped. Would there be five, ten, fifteen, or
twenty, do you think ?There were about twenty.
Do you remember about 2 o'clock, that mob
being joined by any other persons coming from
different parts ? Yes; they thought of having a
meeting in the market-place at Ashton. You
say "they thought"? Yes, but it was ordered
to have it at the back of Thacker's foundry. Is
that in Ashton ? Yes. Now, did you see any of the
people you have mentioned before, at that meeting?
The JUDGE :-There was a meeting at
Thacker's foundry ? Yes. At what o'clock ? A
little after 2 o'clock.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Did you see
there, any of the persons whose names have been
mentioned by you ? Yes: I saw Crossley there.
Where ? In the market-place. What was he
doing? He got into a cart, at the market-place,
and went to address the meeting, but it was
afterwards adjourned to Thacker's foundry. Did
Crossley make a speech ? He said, at the marketplace,- I don't want you to go through a long,
speech-No, no-Do you know William Aitkin ?
Yes. Where did you see him ? At the back of
Thacker's foundry. I believe, Aithin censured
some people for their violence ? He blackguarded
them terribly for going on in the manner they
had done.. Did you see Pilling there ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-They had him at Thacker's
foundry ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Was ar
proposal made as to what should be done ? He
proposed
The JUDGE :-Who proposed ? Piling pro-

66
posed that the people of Ashton should go to I divided? They divided into lots, and some wemt
Oldham, and the people of Stalybridge to to one factory, and some to another. Which way
Hyde.
did you go? I went with them to Thomas AshThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What were ton's factory. What did they do there? They
they to do ? To stop the mills. You say that Pil- ordered the master to stop the mill. Did he do
ling proposed- Yes. Well, was that agreed to ? so ? Yes. Did they turn the hands out ? Yes.
Yes. Are you able to say whether the meeting And what became of the men that they turned
divided itself at all ? Yes, it divided itself. Just out? They were ordered to go up to Hyde along
tell us what was done ?-Speak up, that the jury with the mob. Now, did you go along with them,
may hear you. The Stalybridge people passed or did you go in another direction afterwards ? I
through Hooley Hill and Denton to Hyde. went in another direction. What direction was
What did the Ashton folk do ? I don't know: that ? I went to Newton Moor. In what directhey went somewhere else. Did you go along tion is Newton Moor? It lies between Stalybridgc
with the Stalybridge people through Hooley Hill and Hyde. What did they do there ? They went
and Denton to Hyde ? Yes. Now, are there to Mr. Ashton's factory, and turned the hands
many hatters about there ? Yes. Is that very out. Was there any sort of notice to be given of
much the trade in that part of the country ? Yes ; a meeting ? Yes, they said there was to be a meetit is mostly their business in that part of the ing in Hyde that night. Did you go to that meetcountry. What did the mob do with the hatters ? ing ? Yes. Were you at any meeting on WedWhy they stopped them from working, as they nesday, the 10th of August? Yes. How early in
came to the hat shops. Did you hear any of the morning? About six o'clock. Where? At
them say anything to the hatters ? They said Stalybridge. Now, at that meeting, was there a
they must give over working, till such time as person of the name of Fenton? Yes. Do you
they got a fair day's wages for a fair day's work, know his Christian name? Yes, James. You
and the Charter became the law of the land. know him well? Yes. He is not in the indictNow, at Denton, did you see Crossley? Yes. ment, my Lord.- [To the witness]-You had
What was he doing there ? There were some lads seen him before ? Yes. Was he one of the speakattempting to break the doors open, and he went ers ? Yes. Do not mention the others, as they
to stop them from doing damage. Was he along are not in the indictment.-Was there anything
with the mob? Yes. Was he taking a leading part, said about going to Glossop ? Yes; they were to
or obeying others ? He was amongst the mob go to Glossop to stop the hands from working
there. Did anybody take any leading part in the there. Was it arranged before they broke up,
mob ?-Who acted as a leader? I could not see that any other meeting should be held? Yes.
any leader there. I only saw him stopping at What ! that morning ? Yes. Where did they go
that place. I only saw him at Ashton before. to ? They went to Glossop. Did you go with
But did he go along with the mob from Ashton them ? No, I went home, and they went in the
to Denton, through Hooley Hill? I saw him direction towards Glossop. In what manner did
there. When the hatters were turned out, what they go ?-In any regularity, or order, or how ?
became of him ?-When the hatters were turned They formed themselves into a procession, three
out what became of them ? They were ordered or four abreast. The following morning early,
to proceed along with the mob.
Did the were you at another meeting? I was. Where was
hatters do so? Some of them did.
Now, that, and when ? It was on the 11th, and at the
when the wen were turned out at other Haigh. Was Fenton there? Yes. Was that
places, did you see what became of them ?-Did meeting like the others that you attended ? Yes.
they join the mob ?.- Yes. Was any direction Was anything said about wages? Yes. And
given to them about it? Why, when they got to what else? They advised them to stand out for
Hyde, they ordered the people to fall into ranks, their wages. They were about dropping the Charand proceed along with them. Well, now, from ter at Stalybridge at that time. Did Crossley
Denton where did the mob go next? To Hyde. speak at that time? Yes. Did Fenton speak ?
That was the way they resolved to go to the meet- Yes. Did you know a man of the name of Thomae
ing. Now, I believe, there is a mill at Kingston ? Mahon ? Yes. Did they all three speak ? I don't
Yes. How far is that from HIyde ? A mile. Did know whether Mahon spoke or not that morning.
they stop there? They did; and they told the Was he there ? I don't know. Do you know the
hands that turned out there, to fall into their man ? Yes. Did you see him, either at the meet.
ranks, and proceed along with them. Was there ing before, or on that day? I saw him at the
any shouting, or calling out of any expression meeting the day following. Well, now, on this
whatever? Yes, they shouted, "Fall in, fall in." day (the 11th) what did they do ? Why, they
Now, what became of them when they got to agreed to go to Saddleworth, but he said he would
liyde ?-Did they remain together, or were they not tell them where they must go they behaved

67
themselves so badly the day before. Now, who
was it said that ? Crossley.
The JUDGE :-That was on the 11th. He
said he would not tell them where they were to
go, but they were to follow him ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Did you see
them go towards Saddleworth ? Yes. How many
were there ? About 700 or 800. Did Crossley
go with them ? He went with them out of Stalybridge towards Saddleworth; as I did not follow
them, I don't know anything about them. They
were to meet again at night. Were you at that
meeting at night ? Yes. Where did the meeting
take place? On the Haigh. At what o'clock?
It was far for six o'clock, it might be later at
night. Who were there at that meeting at night ?
I don't recollect anybody. Was there any meeting next morning-on the 12th ? Yes, at the
same place. At what hour in the morning ?
About seven o'clock. Who was the chairman
of that meeting ? I don't know who the chairman was. Did you see any of the parties there
you mentioned ? There was Crossley and Woolfenden. Did you know him well? Yes. Did
Vilcox speak ? Yes. What was said by them ?
Crossley and Fenton supported the wage question, but Woolfenden advised them to stick to
the Charter. Do you recollect what Woolfenden
said ? Why, he spoke very much against shopkeepers, and cotton masters, and the government. Did he say anything about what had
been done in Manchester ? Yes, he said there
were two or three policemen killed, and they
(the workpeople) had been all stopped at Sheffield. This was on the morning of the 12th.
Did Woolfenden give them any advice? He advised them to strike for the Charter. Did you
go with them anywhere that day? No, but in
the evening there was another meeting in the
same place. At what o'clock? It was late in
the evening. Do you remember anybody that
was there ? Thomas Mahon was chairman that
night. Was Stephenson there? I heard so, but
I do not know. Was there any other meeting?
There was a meeting the following morning at
the Haigh. Whom did you see there ? Crossley,
Fenton, John Durham, and Evison. The last
one is not in the indictment, my Lord. [To the
witness.] Was any statement made about a
meeting to be had of other people to discuss the
question ? They said there was to be a meeting
at Hyde that morning, and the speakers were to
go from Stalybridge to address it, on the wage
question. Was there anything said about coming
to any decision ? They agreed to go to Hyde to

address a meeting there. Was it said what they
were to address them about ? About the wages.
Were you at any meeting the same day at Hyde ?
Yes, afterwards.
The JUDGE :-After that? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What passed
then ?-Were any of those people there? Yes,
there wasWilliam Stephenson andCrossley. What
did they say? They wanted the people of Hyde to
give up having anything to do with the Charter.
Mr. MURPHY:-Was Durham any of those
parties ? No, he was not there that morning.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Who wanted
them to give up the Charter? Crossley and
Stephenson. Was Fenton there? Fenton was
not there. What did the people of Hyde say ?
They blackguarded them for coming with such
a tale as that. Who represented the Hyde
people, do you remember ? A man of the name of
Booth. Anybody else ? No; not that morning.
The JUDGE :-We have two of the name
of Booth mentioned. One is a defendant and
the other is not.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The person
to whom the five shillings was handed over is
not a defendant. At what time did the meeting
break up that evening ? I went back again to
Stalybridge. The people went from Stalybridge
to Hyde and talked of wages and the Charter.
There were meetings at the same time in both
places, and they wanted them to have nothing
to do with the Charter, but to get their wages.
What did you find them doing at Stalybridge
when you got there ?-Why they were coming in
from Glossop to have a meeting ? Yes. Where
were they to have the meeting ? At Stalybridge.
Well, did you remain long at that meeting ? At
this meeting it was discussed whether it were to
be a wage question or a Chartist question. It
was what they called " a great meeting." This
was on the 13th.-Did they come to any resolotion ? Yes. What was it? They came to this
resolution that the Stalybridge people must not
vote. They were not to have any vote in it.
The JUDGE :-The Stal3 bridge meeting came
to a resolution that the Stalybridge people were
to have no voting ? Yes : they were to have no
vote in the new Constitution. But the meeting
was at Stalybridge?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-How many
people were at that meeting? Witness :-Several thousands from all quarters. And the Stalybridge people were to have no vote ?
Mr. DUNDAS:-No vote in the new Constitution.

68
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-They disfran- Did Fenton speak? Yes. What did he say?
chised them.
He said something about wages. Did he say
Mr. DUNDAS :-They put them in Schedule anything about the Charter? No. Do you
remember anything being said by Mahon? No.
A.--(Laughter.)
Mr. MURPHY:-Stalybridge shouiA go with Or Leach? Yes. Well, what did Leach say ?
John Leach supported the Charter. What did
Sudbury.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My friend Wilde do ?-Was there another Wilde besides
Dundas says they put them in Schedule A. the one in the chair? Yes. Did Woolfenden
[To the witness.] How did that meeting end speak ?-Who was he in favour of? In favour
after they determined that the Stalybridge peo- of the Charter. Do you know a man they call
ple should not vote ? It was agreed to turn out General Lee? Yes. What is his name? I
for the Charter. Having disfranchised the don't know him by any other name except
Stalybridge people, they agreed to stand out for General Lee. Do you know a man of the name
the Charter. What became of the meeting of Booth, from Newton Heath ? Yes, I should
then ? It broke up and separated.
know him if I saw him. Did he take any part
JOHN WILDE, one of the defendants, said in the discussion? Yes. Which part did he
he wished to ask a question.
take ?-Do you know another man of the name
The JUDGE :-By-and-bye, we will recollect of Booth, from Leigh ? No; I don't.
you.
The JUDGE :-Booth took a part, did he,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Did you see for the Charter ? Yes.
Wilde at any of these meetings? I saw him on
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Did not some
the 13th, at Stalybridge. Was he a Stalybridge one from Stalybridge take part in the meeting?
man ? More a Stalybridge man than an Ashton Yes. Who? Samuel Radcliffe, Fenton, and
man, but he lives at Ashton at present.
several others spoke for the wage question.
The JUDGE :-Was he at, the meeting at
Mr. MURPHY :-For what? For the wage
which it was resolved that the Stalybridge peo- question.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Then, at last,
ple should have no vote ? Yes; he was chaira.n at that meeting.
was there a show of hands? Yes. And how
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Was it put was it carried? All hands were up, only two
to the vote that the Stalybridge people should against it. How many persons were assembled
have no vote ? Yes. And carried? Yes. While at this meeting? Eight thousand or ten thouhe was in the chair? Yes.
sand. Coming from all parts of the country,
The JUDGE :-He put that vote to the I presume ? Yes. Was it the last meeting you
Pray, did you ever see a
meeting, I suppose ? Yes. It was said by the attended ? Yes.
speakers, that the Stalybridge people should placard from the Executive ? I don't know.
have nothing to do with it.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS:-Well,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Where did Buckley, did you hold up your hand at this
You did not hold up your
John Wilde live at that time? At Ashton. Do meeting ? No.
you remember if, while addressing the meeting, hand. It appears you had a good deal of idle
he told what the meeting was about? Well, time on your hands; where did you live in the
there were several called upon to take the chair, idle time of August-those days you have been
but they objected to have anything to do with telling us about? In Stalybridge. Are you a
it. At last they called on John Wilde, and he married man ? Yes. And have a family? Yes.
said he did not like to have" nought to do wi' it;" Where were your family living on the 7th of
but he said as he had been called on he would August? In Saddleworth. Why were they not
do his duty as far as it lay in his power, and living in Stalybridge, with you, sir? Why?would give every person a fair and candid hearing. Yes, " why"-clear your throat, and speak out
Did you hear him say what the object of the like a man! Because I was out of work. And
meeting was ? It was to decide whether it was where were they ? Why, they were at home.
to be a wage question or a Chartist question. Where was that ?-You were living at StalyHe read a resolution, you know-What resolution bridge, you tell me, and they were at home.
was it that he read? What resolution ? why, They were at the workhouse. Your children!
whether it would be a wage question, or a II -Are they at the workhouse still? No. Where
Chartist question; he read that from a paper. are they now? At Stalybridge. How have they

69
got out ? Because I have gotten work. What Well, explain now. Witness s-Well, I will exwork? I am working at a mill. Whose mill? plain it-Don't fly into such a passion! Explain!
Mr. Kirk's. When did you go to work there ? explain II will explain. Will you ? I will exFive or six weeks ago. When did your family plain. Don't be in such a hurry ! If I ask the man
come home from Saddleworth to Stalybridge > to go on, he rises up.
I don't know, I am sure. You don't know, you
The ATTORNEY.GENERAL:-He shall not
are sure ? Not exactly-Three or four months suppress the answer.
since. This month is MarchDo you say
Mr. DUNDAS :-I have nothing to suppress.
they came home in November?Were they
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Then hear
home in November? I don't know. Three or the explanation.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I shall be delighted to hear
four months since did not you say ?-Were you
in work then ?--Were you in work then ? I it, if he goes on. Witness :-There was a watchdon't know; I was doing something. I want man short in the Stalybridge police, four or five
to know whether you were at work three or four months ago. My brother-in-law is a constable
months ago ? Well, when my family came home in Stalybridge; his name is George Bowers. He
I was a special constable. Why did not you and Gatley said, I might watch for two or three
answer that before? Well, perhaps you would weeks. The Commissioners had a meeting, and
not call that working. That is your meaning. I applied to know, whether I might have the
Did you get pay for being a special constable ? situation regular or not, and the Commissioners
I did. When were you appointed a special con- of Stalybridge, said, they thought if they kept
stable? On the 12th of September. How long me on as a watchman, that the people of Staly.
did you continue ? I don't know. Try, and bridge, would not pay the police rate, because I
don't put me off; when did you leave off being had sworn against the Chartists. So, now, I
a special constable ? Well, I was, I think, on have given you my reason. Well, then, I will
about six weeks. How much money, in all, did ask you a question upon that; upon your oath,
you get as a special constable ? They allowed were you not discharged by the Commissioners
us three shillings a-day. When did you leave upon another account, and not upon that ? Well,
it? In six weeks. Where were you acting as I cannot say which way I could be discharged,
special constable ? In Stalybridge. Why did for I never was engaged. Upon your oath, were
you leave it ? Because they had no business you not discharged by the Commissioners of
for me. Do you mean to say you were not dis- Stalybridge from whatever employment, regular
charged-turned off-that is the word ? I have or irregular, on some other account ? The Combeen working since then. Were you not turned missioners of police are Mr. James Kay and Mr.
off from being a policeman ? Police has no- Otley; are not these their names? Yes, Well,
now having mentioned their names, do you still
thing to do with being a special constable.
The JUDGE :-Answer the question; were stick to it, that you were not discharged on some
you not turned off from being a policeman? I other account? Yes. Are you in work now ?
Yes. What do you get ? Fourteen shillings a
was not a policeman.
Mr. DUNDAS:-What, then, were you turned week. At that time you were out of work ?
off for? How came you to leave? I was not Yes. What took you about to those different
"shot"-I had not regular work to stand. You meetings ? I think I had as much right to go
say you had three shillings a day for being a with them as any body else.
special constable-after that what were you at ?
The JUDGE :-You must give another answer
I was watching under the police. What did -What made you go ?- How came you to go to
you get for that ? sixteenshillings a week. Well, those meetings ? Well, I went there, because I
now I want to know, whether you were not dis. thought I would go.
Mr. DUNDAS :-And nobody desired you
charged from the Commissioners of police ? I
say, I could not be discharged, for I never was to go? No matter whether they desired me or
engaged as a regular man. Regular or not were not ?
UDGE :-Wre you desired by anybody
you not discharged ? Well, I was ordered to go to
over, but I shall explain that. You shallexplain it.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Then why not say so, when
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Let him ex- I asked you, on your oath before? I have given
plain it.
you an answer; I said yes. Why did you not
Mr. DUNDAS :-Hte will be

let

explain,

give me the answer "yes"

before, when I asked

70
you, as a true man upon your oath ?-Can you
give an answer to that?-Can you explain that?
What " maun " I explain? Don't you understand what I asked you to explain ? I asked you
before why you went to those meetings, and your
answer was, " I had as much right to go as anybody else;" and now you tell me quite another
thing. I want to know why you told me not
that at first, but another thing ?-Are you
ashamed of having been asked to go ?-Surely
you did not go as a spy, man; did you? Did
you go as a spy ? [No answer.] Did you get
anything for going.
The JUDGE :-Come, answer the question.
Did you get anything for going to those meetings ?
Yes. Were you promised that you should get
something if you went as a spy to those meetings, before you went to them? No, sir, not
before. Who told you to go there before ? I am
not going to tell you. Well, if you do not tell
me whoever it was that told you, were you not
told it would be worth your while to go, or something to that effect ?
The JUDGE :-Answer that question, sir.
Yes.
Mr. DUNDAS :--What have they given you
for going ? I cannot tell you what they have given
me. How much ? Five shillings. Who gave you
that, and will you swear upon your oath that,
that is all you got for spying ? How much have
you got ? Answer like an honest man upon your
oath ? I cannot answer-about £4 or £5 at different times. Have you had the promise of any
more ? No. Did you expect any more for your
services on these occaions-for going about to
spy and report ? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON:-At
what time did you first give information about
these meetings ? It might be about a fortnight
after the commencement of the turn-outs.
The JUDGE :-The first information you
gave. Yes, my Lord, about a fortnight after the
commencement of the turn-out. About a fortnight after the meeting of the 7th ? Yes. Now,
before you gave this information, had you not
seen a proclamation offering a reward of £50.
No, I had not seen the proclamation then.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I think it
was not out. That proclamation came out on
the 15th.
Mr. ATHERTON:-But you did, at some
time or other, see a proclamation offering a reward of 501. to which you now refer; now, can
you tell us when you saw that proclamation?
At the first ? Yes, the first time you saw it.
Sometime in September. Was it before you were
examined by the magistrates at Ashton that you
saw this proclamation ? I believe it was-I am not
certain. Your wife's mother's name is Susan

Green, is it not? Not your wife. O, you have
two wives, have you ? Yes. Are theybothliving?
No, only one. Do you recollect about the time
of the turn-out, calling on Susan Green, the mother of your first wife, and telling her that you
had been watching the turn-out,-that you saw the
lads break Lees's mill-door, and might as well
have 501. as any one else? I have. Do you recollect Susan Green then asking you whether
you would go and swear against your neighbours ?
Yes. And you answered "501." is that so ? I
don't know what sort of a reply I made to the old
woman. Now, do you recollect going afterwards
to Susan Green, and telling her that Boyers bad
been trying you as to the speeches of the turnouts, and you said, that, if it had not been for the
speakers, therewould be more disturbances? Yes.
How long had your family been in the workhouse
before the 7th of August? About a year and a
half. And had you been out of work all that
time? No: I have been off and on different
times. Now, at this time, (the 7th of August,)
were you not a turn-out yourself ? No, I had no
work. You had nothing to turn out from ? No.
How long before that had you been in work ? I
I don't
don't know. That is your answer.
know that I had any regular work. What was
your employment? Labour and out-work. You
were not a spinner ? No.
The JUDGE :-You were not a spinner? I
used to be a rover, which is something in the
same way as spinning.
Mr. ATHERTON:-I understood you to say,
that never before the 7th of August were you in
regular employment? Yes. Your first employment as special constable began shortly after you
gave the information? I gave some little infor
mation before they appointed me a special constable. But, after this information you were appointed? Yes. You continued special constable
sometime, and were then appointed a watchman.
What did you do after the revolution in Stalybridge caused you to be a watchman ? I did nothing until about three weeks ago. Now tell us
how you managed to live during these three
weeks? I cannot tell you. You received no
wages, and still how you lived you don't know?
No. No ? Why there is hardly telling how people
does live now-a-days. Did you live on bread?
Why they had bread. And meat? Not so much
meat. Do you know where you got your bread
from ? Well; I got flour from the shop. Whose
shop ? James Boyers. Did you pay for it? No.
You are still owing for it? Yes. Then, I suppose,
you lived on credit? Ay. I suppose, when you
went about the country with these people, and
saw them turning out the hands, you did not attempt to persuade them not to turn out ?-When
they shouted you did not shout No? No. You

71
can write, can you ? Yes. Did you take any
notes? I did. When? I don't know. Have
you ever, on any other occasion, made use of any
notes which you took of what you had heard ? No.
Have you ever looked at those papers containing
the notes, on former ocpasions ? Yes. You have
looked at those papers on former occasions? Yes.
When you were giving evidence before? No. You
said to-day that you were present at a meeting on
the 12th of August? Yes. You recollect being
examined before the magistrates in September ? Yes. Do you recollect being present at
the meeting of the 12th? Yes. You told the magistrates that? Yes. Are you sure of it? Yes.
You say you were present at the meeting on the
12th of August, and that Crossley was there ?
Yes. I don't know whether he was there on the
13th or not, but he was at the great meeting. You
recollect a meeting of the 11th of August; you say
Fenton was there; are you quite sure of that?
Yes. Were you sure of that when examined before the magistrates ? No, I was not sure on that
occasion. You were not ? Not that day. In
September last, you were not sure that Fenton
was present, but you are now. How did you
happen to become certain of that fact? Because
I had it written down at that time. And you
were not sure, when before the magistrates at
Ashton, but since then you examined it, and
found it to be correct ?
The JUDGE :-Examined what?
Mr. ATHERTON:-The paper. [To the witness.] Just now tell us something about that paper. Tell us when you wrote it. Well, perhaps,
I wrote it on a day or two after the 11th. Now,
tell us when you destroyed it ? I can't tell you
to a week, but it is near two months since I destroyed it. About two months ago ? Yes. Now,
will you tell us why you destroyed it? Why, I
thought it would never be wanted no more.
Were you at Chester? Yes. To give evidence ?
Yes. Was the paper then produced? Yes.
Now, did not you know two months before you
destroyed that paper that you would be wanting at
this Assizes? I thought I could keep it in my head.
I did not know whether I should be wanting or
not, because people thought there would be no
trial. But did not you think you would have to
give evidence ? I did not knowv that ever they
'would be wanting any more. Were you before
the grand jury in October, at Liverpool ?Yes.
And you were that day examined about those
matters you were speaking to ? Yes. And it
was after that you destroyed those papers? Yes.
Cross-examined byMr. Mc OUBREY: How
came your family to be in the workhouse, and
you abroad? Well, about fourteen months ago,
there was me and three more that was in the
workhouse. We asked leave to go out and work
F

on the railway that they were cutting in Oldham,
and the Governor and Guardian of the poor
agreed that we should not go. We then left the
workhouse of our own accord, and we did not
get work for three or four weeks. The Governor sent us word that we had no need to go
any more to the workhouse. He said he would
not admit us. But did he admit your family ?
The family was there. And do you mean to say
you left your family in the workhouse ? Yes.
And they remained there for fourteen months?
Yes; I am saying that, it is about foirteen months
since I went out. It is fourteen months since you
went out, and you left your family in there ?
Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Now,
Buckley, let us see if we can get into good humour. Can you recollect when you got the first
instalment of money ?-The date when you got
the first instalment?-When was the first payment made to you?-Now, think; I don't want to
puzzle you ? Why, it might be about the 16th or
17th of August. Might it happen to be a fortnight before that ?-Are you speaking of a
fortnight before that ?-About ?-Might it be so ?
No. Did you get any money before the 10th ?
Not as wages. I borrowed some from my brother-in-law. Did not you say that you got 41. or
51. altogether ?-Might it be 61. ? No. Are you
certain you did not get more ? I am. While
your family and you were in the workhouse, what
is the longest period that you were at a steady
job ? Why, I think it was somewhere about five
weeks that I was a special constable. Was that
the only job you had for fourteen months ? No.
Since you came out of the workhouse your family
remained there; holy long a period during that
time were you in steady work ? Why, I was in
Yorkshire seven months, on and off. And aWt
that time your family were in the workhouse ?-Did you bring your family home when you got
the 3s. a day as special constable? Yes. Now,
on your oath, did you give the 3s. a day to your
family ? Yes. Upon your oath did you give any
portion of it to them? Yes. How much ? I
always gave my wife what I got. As special
constable ? Yes. Every farthing? I will not say
every farthing. Was your wife receiving support
from any other quarter than from your wages ?
[No answer]. Now you have been asked before
how it happened that you followed those meetngs about-were not those meetings riotous, and
did they not create great alarm in the neighbourhood? Yes. Yet you followed them ! Did ther
alarm you? They did. Did they alarm you
much ? Sometimes. How did it happen that
you followed them so much when you were so
much alarmed? I did not follow thea1 I only
attended the meetings.

Have .

not swor, to

72
the several transactions which took place ? Only Chester, and the hope of 501. Now, upon your
to those which took place on Monday. Is that oath, have you told the whole truth here to-day ?
The
the only day you followed them? Yes. Did notyou I have, to the best of my knowledge.
follow them when Crossley stopped the boys from whole truth, without a single variation? Yes.
breaking thehatter's doors? Thatwas on the Mon- Boyers was the man you bought bread from ?
day. Is that the only day youfollowed them? Yes. Yes. He trusted you? Yes. How long were
Were you not at a meeting on Sunday? Yes. youlivingthere without work? [No answer.] Did
They were singing when you got there ? Yes. you give Boyers anything out of the fifty shilThey did not frighten you ? No. It was the ling or the five pounds ?-Did you never pay him,
singing frightened you.--But, on your oath, when although, when you were a " Rover," you got
Crossley went with them, did not he say,," I will that on credit, that you would pay him when you
Do you recollect
go with you, if you allow me to prevent you from got into work again ? Yes.
doing harm, or if you will follow my advice to what you swore to, before the magistrates in
you? What about ? I
abstain from violence ?" I never heard him say September last ? -Do
anything of the sort. Did you, when examined don't know, that is what I want to know. Do you
before the magistrates, tell all that you knew? remember what you swore to before the magisNo, I did not tell all. You have sworn here to- trates ? Ask me some instances ? Was what you
day, that Leach was one of the principal speakers swore to before the magistrates shewn to you
of the 13th. Did you swear to Leach being at in writing before you swore to it ?-Were the dethat meeting of the 13th ? I don't know. Now, positions you made before the magistrates read
after your examination before the magistrates,were to you, or given to be read to you since you
you bound over to appear to give evidence ? Not swore to them ? Well, they were read up to me a
What a memory for a man to reagainst Leach. Were you against any party ? Yes. time or two.
You were. Did you use your papers when before collect, in March, all that happened since the
the magistrates ? No. You swear to that ?-You 7th of August last ?-Where were they read up to
had your papers then, and did not use them-you you ? They were read in Manchester.
By
swear you did not use them ? Yes. And you are whom? I don't know. Do you see him in
bound over to appear again on the trial, and, in Court ? No. It is not Wilde, the chairman?
the meantime, you destroy them ?-Were you ex- No. When were they read to you again ?-When
amined at Chester ? Yes. Were the men you were they last read to you ?-Now, come, sir,swore against convicted or acquitted ? They were we must have an answer; upon your oath, when
convicted and acquitted. How many were ac- were they last read to you ? [Witness hesitated,
quitted ? One was convicted, and two were ac- and appeared altogether unwilling to answer the
quitted. Now, did you get anything for that job? question.]
Not much. How much ? Fifty shillings. What
ire you to get for this job? I don't know.
Now, come, as a moderate man, what have you
been led to expect ?-Has any one told you? No.
No one has told you what you are to expect? No.
Were you told by any one that you would get the
whole 501. if you convicted the parties ? Nobody
ever has told me that. Did you say it yourself?
No, never. No, I never said I should have 501. if,
they were convicted. What did you say you
would have the 501. for ? I mean to say that I
never said I would have 501. for those persons.
No, but it was for the general conviction ? It was
for that job at Chester I said I should have the
fifty. Now, why did you tell me that you never
said you would have the 501? You were making
it more than I said. I said fifty shillings.
Now, sir, upon your oath, did you shew your
papers to any one before you burned them ?-On
your oath.-Now, answer that.- On your oath
did any one ever tell you to destroy them ?
Never. Did you read them to any one ? Never.
You never shewed them, nor read them to any
one? No. What did you get for going to Liverpool? Fifty shillings. And fifty shillings forI

The JUDGE :-Come, answer the question;
when was the last time the depositions were read
over to you? They were read to me to day.
[Great sensation in Court.]
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Go down, sir.
JOHN WILDE, one of the defendants:-In
speaking of the meetings of the 13th of August, the
witness said I was the chairman; now, I am here
alone, and have not the means of procuring counsel to defend myself, and I wish to know when
my trial will come on, so that I may be prepared
to defend myself to the best of my ability.
The JUDGE :-Your trial is going on now(laughter.)
JOHN WILDE :-Well, then, I think it is
my time to ask a few questions.
The JUDGE:-No doubt, you are quite
right. Ask him as many questions as you
wish.
WILDE :-In what manner was that meeting conducted?
The JUDGE :-You are speaking of the
second meeting now--the large meeting ?

WILDE :-This is what he calls the large that I have mentioned ? Yes. You gave evidene
at Chester ? Yes. And you received some money
meeting.
for it? Yes. For your expenses? Yes. How much?
The JUDGE :-Yes, the greatkeeting.
WITNESS :-Why, the people were very fifty shillings. There were other witnesses at
rough, and the speakers were very rough, one Chester, do you know how much they received ?
against another, respecting the wages question, There were witnesses who received more thar,
and the Chartist question. Was it on account me, a good bit. Did you receive the common
of the wage question, and the Chartist question ? allowance of witnesses ? Why, my money at
Yes. Were there not persons there who obChester, was fifty shillings, and fifty shillings
jected to the Charter being carried out?
The JUDGE :-Wilde objected to its being a again at Liverpool. Did you go from Stalybridge ? Yes. How many miles had you to go
Chartist question ? Yes.
WILDE :--Were there not two individuals to Chester? Forty-two. How long did you
days away. Did
who left the cart on account of the difference stay at Chester ? I was nine
cart ?-Did the fifty shillings pay all your expenses those
that arose ?-How many left the
? It
not Woolfenden, Woodroffe, Johnson, Radcliffe, nine day's, or did you get any thing more
the meeting cost me three pounds altogether. Did you get
and Aitkin, leave the cart because
the fifty shillings to pay for your keep while you
were making it a Chartist question? Woolfenden
but whether he left the were there, and nothing else ? I got nothing but
made a speech there,
the fifty shillings altogether.
cart or not I do not know.
The JUDGE:-But you say it cost you three
:-He made a speech in favour of
The JUDGE
pounds. Fifty shillings for Liverpool, and fifty
the wage question ? No, in favour of the Chartists.
shillings for Chester, and the expenses of 1W.4
WILDE :-He left the Chartist on the wage
these places amounted to three pounds ? Yes.
question.
Then, you got out of it forty shillings.
The JUDGE :-Did he leave the cart? Yes.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL :-An,' you
their putting
Did he leave it in consequence of
were only before the Grand Jury at Liverpool ?
up the Chartist question ? No.
WILDE :-Was not the resolution put into Yes. When did you come here? On Tuesday.
my hand to put to the meeting, and did I not In the morning, or in the middle of the day ?
tell them that I would not put that resolution It was near night when I got here on Tuesday.
JOSEPH OLIVER, examined by Mr. WORTin the shape it was framed? They requested me
to stay in the chair, and carry out the meeting, LEY:-Are you employed as overlooker in Mi.
and I did so on condition of seeing it terminating Samuel Robinson's mill, at Duckinfield? I am.
peaceably. I said I would try to have the un- Were you at a meeting on Hall Green, on the sewho was ia
derstanding of the meeting, whether it would be cond or third of August ? Yes. Name
wai
a wage question, or a Charter question, and I the chair ? I believe a person named Wilde
to the in the chair, but I will not swear to it. Who
put the resolution verbally, objecting
terms in which it was drawn up. After that spoke on that occasion ? A good many persons
was done there was very little said, but the spoke. Challenger and Pilling spoke. Was any
meeting broke up and we all dispersed. Is snot resolution passed? There was a resolution
that so? Yes, they broke up peaceably,-they passed to that effect. To what effect ? That, if
broke up very peaceably at last. You said you the masters persisted in the abatement, the
put them notes down; whether did you put people should turn out, and stop out, till they
them down that day, or the morning following? got a fair day's wages for a fair day's work, and
I put them down the same day, or the same until the Charter became the law of the land.
The JUDGE :--And carried, was it? Why,
night at all events. As you have been at a great
many meetings, and followed various processions, sir, they had a particular way of doing their
and led thema up on many occasions, did you business; it was put off to some particular time,
ever see me with them ? No, except at that I reckon. "If the masters persisted in their
abatements," what then? Why, that they (the
meeting.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: work-people) should stop out till ther got a fair
-You never saw him except at that meeting? day's wages for a fair day's work, and until the
No. And have you given a correct account of Charter became the law of the land. And they
what passed at that meeting? Yes. Do you stopped out ? Yes, sure.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Can you tell who p)rop('scu
recollect seeing Wilde there, and the other people

74
tadseconded that resolution? Not exactly.
Challenger or Pilling either proposed :r seconded
it, I cannot say which. Do you mean that the
one proposed it, and that the othes seconded it ?
Well, I cannot say so. What was done with the
resolution? It was not put to the vote, to the
best of my knowledge. Were you at another
neeting -afterwards ? I have been at many a
one Were, you at a meeting at Thacker's foundry.? Yes. Did you see Pilling there ? Yes.
Did he speak? Yes. Did he say anything
about Oldham? Ay, he said he had been at
Oldham the Saturday before the turn-out (the
6th of August), and said he would advise the
people of Oldham to go to a meeting that would
take place on Mottram Moor, on Sunday. Who
said that? Pilling. What more did he say
about Oldham? Why, he said he met with
some opposition at Oldham. Did he say what
he had done ? Why, he said he went there,
and advised them to :turn out at Oldham. He
said there had -been some of his lads there on
Monday, and they raked some fires out, and
knocked some plugs from the boilers. What
did you understand him to mean by his lads?
I understood him to mean his mob. Is that all
he said about Oldham? No; there were two
men to come to Ashton, to let him know whether they were to turn out or not. Did he let
them know when they were to come ? That
morning.
The JUDGE:-This was on the 10th? Yes,
sir.
Mr. WORTLEY :-And when they had come,
what was to be done? Why, he said, if they
did not turn out quietly, he doubted his lads
would break some of their heads. Did he say
anything about being anywhere else besides at
Oldham? Why, he said he was to go round as
a delegate to different parts of the country, to
get the hands out. Were you present at another
meeting in Duckinfield, on the 15th of August?
Yes. Who was in the chair that day ? James
Thorpe. Did you see Challenger there? Yes.
Did he speak? He did. Was there a person
of the name of Platt there? Yes; James Platt.
understood they
What did he say? He said hlie
were not turned out for the Charter, but for the
wages. What did Challenger say to that ? He
referred to the meeting which took place on
Hall Green, the 2nd or 3rd of August. He said
he was there, and drew up a resolution for it.
this resolution was to the effect, that if the
nasters persisted in the abatements, they (the

work-people) would turn out, and stop out till
they got a fair day's wages for a fair day's
work, and the Charter became the law of the
land. Did he refer to any other meeting ? Yes,
to a meeting which took place at Charlestown,
where he said, they made him secretary. Did
he say secretary to what? It was the weavers
that were turning out, and I understood that
they made him secretary to the weavers. It was
the Messrs. Reyner's, of Ashton, who had
given notice of a reduction of the wages
Did he say anything
of these weavers.
about being at Preston? He did. He said there
was no use in turning out for wages; but if the
people of this neighbourhood would go for the
Charter, they, (the Preston people,) would go for
the Charter, and fight for the Charter. Did he

went on as he left it, he had no doubt but it would
be in a blaze before this. Did he say anything
about Manchester ? Yes, he said he had been at
Manchester, and the people of Manchester were
for the Charter. It was not for the people of
Ashton, Duckinfield, or Stalybridge, to say whether they would go for wages or the Charter or
not; it was to be decided at the great delegate
meeting at Manchester. Less than these turnouts had brought on revolutions, and referred to
a great emperor ravishing a woman, and to the
case in England of Wat Tyler. He believed the
time was very near when a Cromwell, an Emmett,
or a Fairfax would be found amongst the people;
and advised the people to look up to Feargus
O'Connor, Bronterre O'Brien, andDr.M'Douall,
It was at Duckinfield that passed. Did you see
Challenger that evening ? Stop yet; I am not
done yet. I saw him at Ashton, at another meeting. He spoke there. There was a great bother:
people were running backward and forward, losing
their shoes, shawls, and bonnets; and he said
there was a dog-battle. What did Challenger
say about the dog-battle ? He said, if they intended to go through with the Charter, they must
not run away looking at two little whelps fighting.
The JUDGE: - They must not have their
attention diverted by two dogs fighting-that is
what is meant ? Just as you please.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-You
say, that on the turn-out ofsome mills that Challenger was appointed secretary to the weavers?
No, I did not say so. Yes, you did. I said
nought about hands turning out. You said, that
when the masters gave notice of an abatement
then Challenger was appointed secretary to the
weavers ? Ay, very true. You are an overlooker,

are you not ? I am employed in a cotton-mill. Buckingham Palace. Did you take any notes.
Do you mean to say you are an operative ?- of whatyou swore before the magistrates ? I
You are not an overlooker or manager? No. have taken notes, and had them taken for me.
Well, it is not usual for a person to be employed Have you had any conversation as to what you
by his own craft to go and inform himself of what were to s
is going on It is sometimes done in our neighevidence.
bourhood, I know. Yes, it is sometimes done person came to me, and I gave him my
in your neighbourhood;-that a man goes about Who was the person ? I don't know his name.
to inform himself.--Every one must regret to see You don't know his name.-Did he write down
a fellow-creature afflicted with any malady.-Have your name ?-Were you introduced to him ? Yes,
you ever been afflicted with any malady ? No. I was introduced into a room. Where? At the
Is your memory affected? No. Has anything Commercial Inn, in Ashton. Don't be angry
been the matter with you ? Why, I have had a with me. Well, don't cry out so bluff. When
fever which plagued me for two days, but I am did you see what was written down last ? Tonothing the worse for it. Then your constitution day. Where ? Up-stairs. Who read it over to
is strong ? Ay, I think it rather better sincd I
read it over myself. Who sent it to
had the fever. Then the fever has served your you ? I don't know who sent it to me. Who
memory ? Ay, sir. You say, that when Challenger g
came from Preston, he said if it were as he left gave it to you ?-Was it read out to you ?-On
your oath was it given to you, what you were t4
it, it would be in flames ? Yes. Were you ex- i swear here in the presence of other witnesses
the presence of other witnesses
before the magistrates ifn September, inin
amined
Manchester ? Yes. Did you mention that about up-stairs.
The JUDGE :-Not what he was to swear,
Challenger ? No. Did you mention his name ?
I did; but I did not tell what passed, as I heard but what he has sworn to. What he has been
he had gone to America. Did you tell other examined to.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-What was taken down at
things that Challenger had said ? I said he was
at those meetings. Did you mention what he Ashton, at your dictation, was it shewn to you
said at those meetings? No. 'No, not a word? in the presence of other witnesses up-stairs
Not to my knowledge. Do you recollect, now, Not in my presence. Did you see any other
whether you did mention it, or not? I do not. persons reading any other scraps ?-Answer the
You are sure of that now ?- Not a word to my question. Ay, I will, man! [striking the wit
knowledge. I believe you were averse to com- ness-box] that is the reason I came here
ing here ? Well, as to that, my friends were (Laughter). Well, upon your oath, while you
opposed to my coming here. Who sent for you were reading your own depositions, were there
to come here ? A person came over to Ashton, others reading theirs at the same time ? Not
and sent for me. Who was it ? Do you know at the same time. Well, were they reading
his name? I don't know his name. A stranger them at different times ? Well, I believe there
came to you. Your friends were opposed to your were other persons who read their depositions.
coming here, and a mere stranger came to you ? over besides me. Did you hear any depositions.
Yes; he came to me for me to give my evidence, besides your own read over? No. Who gave
Did you ever see him before ? Not that man I you your depositions ? I don't know. Was it
did not. Do you know his name? I cannot one of the witnesses in the room? No. Did
swear that I do. Did you ever see him before? the person who gave them to you deliver depoNot to my knowledge. Then, of course, you sitions to others also, at the same time ?-Comie
don't know his name; and, although you re- now, I know you will speak the truth.-Don't
fused the advice and solicitations of your friends, look about now: look at the Judge, and give
who wanted you not to come, at the bare soli- your ear to me, and your eye to the jury.-Upon
citation of a stranger, whom you never saw your oath, did this person, at the same time,
before, you did come ? I thought it was my give depositions to the other witnesses? I believe
duty. Did you know a man of the name of he gave them something; I don't know what
Newton? Yes. Did he go to you? No. Did it was.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- Don't call
he send to you about anything concerning this
trial ? Newton told me to prepare myself. That them depbositions-he does not know what they
is the Robert Newton, I believe, that said he were.
-as going to London to meet the Duke of Wed.

Mr. O'CONNOR:-Yes, Mr. AttorneyGene-

lington, and attack the House of Lords and ral, he does.

[To witness]

Were the papers

76
made up, and sewn in the same way as yours ?
Yes, they were. I came here telling the truth.
I know you did-I would not ask the last witness
a question of the kind. I know yos' will tell the
whole truth, but vou are so angry I am obliged
to raise my voice. Well, don't bring things out
so bluff. This is a dry job; I'd like to have a
glass with you; I am getting very dry. (Laughter) Will you have a glass of wine? Did you ever
tell the magistrates anything about looking up
to Feargus O'Connor, Bronterre O'Brien, and Dr.
Il'Douall ? No. Now, tell me, on your oath, did
any one suggest anything to you that you were
to swear? I have sworn. It is on your oath,
did any one suggest anything to you that it
would be well to swear? Who mentioned that
fact relative to O'Connor, O'Brien, and M'Douall?
-When was that first mentioned by you ? Well,
it was after Challenger was taken up. When
was that ?-Tims eve ?-Do come to dates. O,
but I will na come to dates-1 will tell no lies.
When did you first mention it ?-How long ago ?
WVell, I think it is about two months ago. Who
did you mention it to ? To Robert Newton. But
you never mentioned that of Preston being in a
blaze? 0 no, I am green in business. Yes, but
laze O nonOrders
you are determined not to be long green. No,
I am learning it. I came here to learn a little
butMr. WORTLEY :-He said there was no use
in mentioning it to the magistrates, as Challenger
went to America.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Burning towns, and assuming the character of Cromwell, Fairfax, and
Emmett, and breaking heads, are all important
transactions. You speak here to-day about Pilling saying that he sent over his lads to Oldham,
and that if the workpeople there employed did not
turn out, his lads would be cracking their heads.
Did you mention that to the magistrates? No.
Here then we have the burning of cities, and the
cracking of heads, and not a word of that said before the magistrates. Now, is what you dictated
to the gentleman in the Commercial Inn, in Ashton-is that in that examination ? Yes, word for
word; I examined it this morning, and find it
correct.-(Laughter.)
Re-examinedby Mr.WORTLEY :-Have you
come here on a subpena? Yes. Was that gentleman, who gave you the subpoena, a stranger whom
you don't know ?-Who gave you the subpoena ?
One of the Ashton police. How came you to go
to the gentleman to whom you were introduced?
-Who told you to go up to him? Robert Newton, the constable of Ashton. He told you to go
ip to the Inn, to Newton ? Yes. Is not Newton

a stone-mason at Stockport? No, he has been a
constable in Ashton for many years.
The JUDGE :-Your Robert Newton is not
the stone-mason of that name? No, not that I
know of-not the Robert Newton that I know.
Mr. W
shewn to you to-day in writing? Yes. Was that
examination as taken at Ashton, a true statement
of facts ? It was what I stated, to the best of my
knowledge, and I believe it was "reet." You
were examined before the magistrates? Yes.
When was that? Sometime in September. You
were never examined against Challenger before
the magistrates? No. But you mentioned that
he was at that meeting? Yes. He was not under
charge before the magistrates? No;it he was off;
and told Robert Newton
he went to America,him. II thought was no use
saying ought about
saying ought about him.

I told Robert Newton

that I should never hesitate for a moment to go
before Challenger.
Mr.O'CONNOR :-Would it be inconvenient
to your Lordship to adjourn?
The JUDGE:-It would be extremely agreeable, but I am afraid I cannot do §o till seven
o'clock-say another hour.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I have to apply to your
Lordship that the last witness may not leave.
to that effect were given by the Judge.
SAMUEL BANNISTER was then called and
sworn.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Have you been in Court
yesterday ? I was in a few minutes looking after
a party of thieves, who, I heard, were in Court.
Examined by Sir GREGORY LEWIN:What are you? I am chief constable of Preston.
Is there a Chartist meeting-room there? Yes.
Do you attend there ? Yes, occasionally. Were
you there prior to the 12th of August last, at a
meeting ? Yes. What did you hear stated on
that occasion ? It was announced that there would
be a meeting on the evening of the 12th of August, and that Aitkin and Challenger would be
there.
Mr.DUNDAS :-I object to that; there is no
person present.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-They are in the
indictment. On the evening of the 12th of August
was there a meeting? Witness :-There was.
Who spoke at that meeting ? Two persons announced by the chairman as Aitkin and Challenger, came forward and spoke. Was any resolution
moved by either of them ? I don't recollect, but
each of them spoke in support of the resolutions.
Do you remember the nature of the resolutions..
-I do not want to have them word forword. One
of the resolutions was, that the people of Preston
were not to go to work till the Charter became
the law of the land.

77
Mr. ATHERTON :-I object to this evidence,
inasmuch as Challenger is not identified.
The JUDGE :-Who do you appear for, Mr.
Atherton ?
Mr. ATHERTON :-I appear for Stephenson
and Fenton; but your lordship is aware that, in
a charge of this kind, the evidence is material to
each of the defendants. I am aware that your
lordship has already ruled a case of a similar
description, but there is a marked difference between it and this particular case. In that case
the man announced as John Leach stated that
he had been at Stockport, had a conversation
with the mayor, &c.; but on the present occasion there is no evidence of identity at all.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-The last witness
proved that Challenger had been at Ashton, and
that he said there, " If Preston is going on as I
left it, I have no doubt but it will be in a blaze
before this."
Mr. ATHERTON :-This indictment charges
Challenger, and this witness is called, for the
purpose of affecting Stephenson, as far as my
argument is concerned, to state something which
the defendant Challenger said at Preston. Now,
I submit, my Lord, that the only evidence afforded is not such evidence as would warrant
your lordship to allow this conversation to be
detailed for the purpose of fixing the Challenger
of this indictment, as the Challenger who was
at Preston. Your lordship decided a cimilar case
in the Court of Exchequer (which case was not
a criminal case like this, where the evidence is
more strict than in civil actions), as to whether,
in evidence of the similarity and identity of a
deed, the name was sufficient to prove that the
defendant on the record made the promissory
note; and your lordship knows that the Court
of Exchequer held that the mere circumstance
of identity of name was not sufficient. Now, I
submit, that there is not sufficient evidence to
connect the Challenger of which this witness
speaks, with the Challenger on the record; this
identity of name is not in itself sufficient.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-This is evi-.
dence to go to a jury ; and it is for them to exercise their judgment upon it, and determine
whether such evidence is sufficient. The last
witness distinctly stated that Challenger, on the
15th, at Duckinfield, said, "I have been at
Preston; all the streets are barricaded." He
then spoke of the condition of the town, and
said, " If Preston is in the same state that I left
it, it will be in a blaze. The men at Preston

are all for the Charter t there is no use in turning out for wages." Now that is evidence reHe had
specting Challenger, the defendant.
been at Preston shortly before, and that which
we now propose to show is, that he was at a
meeting connected with the Charter, three days
before, at the Chartist meeting-room.
The JUDGE: The man of Preston said " there
is no use in turning out for wagas, but if the
people of this neighbourhood would go for the
Charter, they (the Preston people) would go for
The
the Charter, and fight for the Charter.
streets were barricaded, and not a soldier to be
seen, and if Preston were as he left it, he had
no doubt but it would be in a blaze before this."
I think it is quite clear.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-That shows
that he was there.
The JUDGE :-I think it is quite clear.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Now, Mr. Bannister.
The JUDGE :-One resolution was, that thIe
Preston people were not to go to work till the
Charter became the law of the land.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Was that the second day? Yes. Was the question put? Yes,
and carried. There was some discussion before
that, whether it should be a question of wages
or of the Charter, and they decided that it should
be a question of the Charter only. What was
the second resolution ? I do not exactly recollect,
but there were several resolutions passed. Of
what nature were the resolutions ? Give us the
substance of them. One of the speakers spoke
at great length to induce them not to go to work.
Another proposed that they would go to the
present place of meeting every morning, as the
factory operatives were going to work, and prevent those who were disposed to go to work,
from doing so.
The JUDGE :--Repeat that again. The resolution was to this effect, that they should meet
at the place they were then meeting on (this
was on a large space of ground called the
Orchard) at an early hour in the morning, and,
at noon, to prevent such persons as were disposed to go to work, from doing so. They were
to meet twice a day for that purpose.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-I think you say
there were other resolutions ? Yes, there were
They were all extremely
other resolutions.
violent, but I cannot recollect them distinctly
and specifically. You say those two persons
called Aitkin and Challenger made speeches;

78
to you recollect nay particular passages in the pose of informing them that the riot act would be
speeches of either? I do. Challenger said, that read. One of the mob cried out, "Read and be
the masters of Preston, or the cotton lords of damned! " A stone was thrown, which knocked
Preston, were the greatest tyrants in the country. the riot act out of the mayor's hand By that
mo
It was well known that they ground their work- time a portion of the by the mob,one to ourrear;
we were also flanked
and the showers
inen down more than any other persons; getting of stones were tremendous, as they were coming
their work done cheaper, and therefore they upon us from all sides. The riot act was then
could undersell their neighbours. He used a read, the stones still flying. I then went with
great deal of vulgar language, calling the mas- Captain Woodford to tell the mob that the riot
ters many vulgar names. You are speaking act had been read. There was at this time a
now of Challenger ? Yes. Well, with regard to considerable portion of the mob in our rear, and
Aitkin ? Aitkin boasted of having suffered in the also in two streets by which we were flanked,
cause of the people, and said, he had already as well as in our front. One of those streets
been imprisoned; but he would do anything is called Chapel Walks. Showers of stones came
lie used from them over the houses. There is a place at
more he could to assist them.
great
Lne-stree,
much violent language. Anything more ? I don't the lower part of are deposited, where we could
number of stones
and
recollect anything more in particular. I believe
I distinctly see the women bringing stones in
there were great disturbances on the following their brats and aprons, and laying them down
day ? Yes. About five o'clock the next morning, in the street for the use of the mob.
I attended at the Orchard myself, and found
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-To form a dept ?
some persons, perhaps a hundred, assembled.
Yes, sir. Having made several efforts to disperse
The JUDGE:-Why is that called the Or- the mob, or get through them without effectchard? It is not really an orchard, 1 suppose ? What sort of efforts do you mean? Why, going
No, it is a large space of ground; I suppose it down in a body with the constables, and the
was formerly an orchard.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN;-You found about military in the rear, and charging them. What
100 people there at the time ? Yes. I saw they
were accumulating. Their numbers were increasing. I then went back to the station, leaving
some constables to watch the proceedings of the
mob, and sent a report to the mayor of the
borough. I then returned towards the Orchard;
and was met by one of my men, who said, that the
mob had moved towards a factory. I sent another message to the mayor, with a view to calling
out the military, as the police force was then only
fifteen or sixteen men. I was engaged with the
mayor, endeavouring to get the soldiers together,
and I heard from time to time that the mob wasp
going round the town; the soldiers were called
out, about thirty of the 72d Highlanders, and I
then proceeded with the soldiers and magistrates
down Fishergate; and a short distance before we
came to Lune-street, we met an immense mob of
persons. The force we had then was walking in
a very narrow compass, and the mob was likely to
pass, so we were ordered to halt and form a wider
rank. We ultimately stopped the mob from
coming up that street. We then proceeded down
Fishergate and Lune-street round a large factory
i(Paley's) and, rson return, up Lune-street,
s;
our
the mob. We there halted, and faced about with
a view of dispersing the mob, and made a great
many efforts to do so; Captain Woodford, chiefcounty constabulary, and myself,
constable of thec
going on opposite sides of the street, for the pur.-

had the constables in theirhands ? Nothing

more than ordinary staffs; none of them had
cutlasses. At length, the Mayor ordered the
soldiers to fire. I did not hear what was the
word of command; but they did fire. What
was the consequence of the firing ? I saw several of the foremost of the mob drop in the
street.
How many soldiers were present?
Thirty. -How many rounds did they fire ? I
don't know the exact number; they did not fire
in a body, but by platoons. The mob stood
mute; the did not attempt torun; they stood
for some minutes, as if thunder-struck. How
long did they stand ? About two or three minutes; but I was then in such a state of agitation, I could not take particular notice of the
time. They then retired, and we were ordered
to retire up Fishergate-street. I believe some
were killed ? Yes. How many? Four died
ultimately; and a fifth man, who was wounded,
had his leg taken off. We halted a short time
in Fishergate-street, at the end of Lune-street;
and, having prevailed on the mob to retire, we
went to our stations and quarters. Did the mob
disperse after that? They did, sir. Is there
anything further in relation to the transactions
of that day ? I don't recollect anything else
material. Did you, afterwards, visit any of the
mills where the mobs had been ? I did. What

79
I did not per- were close at hand. And then the people dis.
persed quietly ? After a short time. Now, I want
to know how it happens, that the resolution being
the most important thing that occurred, you cannot give us an account of what it was ?-Did you
take notes of the speeches? No. Itook notes of
the inflammatory speeches. Did you take notes
of anything that was not inflammatory ?-What
Saturday.
was the second resolution? I would not underCross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-I will take to say what the words of it were. Yot
just ask him a word-You and Captain Wood- would not undertake to say more about it than
ford went one on each side of the street, to dis- that the word" Resolved" was in it ?-Upon your
oath, were you aware that the strike was occasuade them from continuing their movement,
sioned in Preston in consequence of the notice
and the mob proceeded on ? No, the mob were
given by Messrs. Ainsworth to reduce the wages
at a halt then. I understood you to say, that of their hands ? No. Was there any notice of a
the constables then in front of the military went reduction? I certainly did hear that there had
had they done at those mills?

ceive that they done any particular mischief at
the mills. The fact was, as soon as the mills
were desired to stop, they did so. On the following day was every place quiet, and did the
mills resume their work? They did. On what
day of the week was the 13th of August?

down and charged the mob ? After considerable
hesitation they did so. Now, did the constables
give way ?-And did the military shew themselves, and charge the mob before the order for
" fire ?"
The JUDGE :-The military did not charge
them before they fired.
WITNESS :-I have before stated, that the
constables were between the military and the

people.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-At the time the people
were standing, and the constables were between
the soldiers and the people, were the constables
laying about them with their sticks ? Some of
them were, sir. And the people were standing?
Yes. And the constables were laying about
them ? Some of them were. How long did
the firing continue altogether ? I should think
not more than two or three minutes. That
is a long time. They fired in single platoons.
Single firing! And the people did not stir?After the first shot they appeared motionless,
you say? Yes, from the distance in which I
was. Was the firing kept up for two or three
minutes? Yes, but in the most deliberate way.
I dare say it was, Pop - Pop- pop !- Was
there a pop each second ? More than a second.
I should think there were three seconds between
each. There are sixty in a minute. Was there
pop-pop-pop! about twenty in a minute; and
did this continue for several minutes after the
people were motionless ? [No answer.] Now,
did you hear that the mayor was rash in ordering
the military to fire ? No, but on the contrary, I
heard him praised in all quarters, for firing on
them. After the military had retired you went
among them? I did not. I understood you to say,
in answer to Sir Gregory Lewin, that you went
among them yourself? I did, but the soldiers

been a dispute between some of the workmen and
the Messrs. Ainsworth about a reduction, and

that some of the men did turn out in consequence.
When did you hear that? Not till the Monday
after the turn-out took place. Do you mean to
state, on your oath, that you did not hear a word
of the reduction prior to the meeting on the 12th,
at which Aitkin and Challenger were present ? 1
did not hear it till the Monday. Then how did
you hear it It was related to me in this way :
?
persons were drawing comparisons between the
different masters, as to who were the most liberal

or illiberal, and the Messrs. Ainsworth were then
accused of reducing their wages more than others.
Did you see any of the men that were killed ?
I saw some of them. Did you go to the inquest?
I did. Did you examine the bodies ? I did not.
On your oath, (id you not see any of them ? Not
one. On your oath, did you see two men wounded
The ATTO NEY-GENERAL:---I
must object to this eternally putting to the witness what
he has heard.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Well, then, I won't
press it.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY - GENE-

RAL :-You say there were thirty of the regular
force there ? Yes, there were not more than eighty
persons altogether.

How wide was the street in

which you were ? It is a street of ordinary width
-about thirty feet at the utmost. How many
persons were in front of you, can you tell? Some
thousands. And how many persons were at your
back ?-I am speaking of the time when the order
was given to fire ? There was a dense mob both in
our front and rear. I understood you to say, that

there were side streets from which the stones
were coming over the houses ?

The JUDGE :-I do not see what relevancy
that has at all, one way or the other.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- No, my
Lord, but one would endeavour to preserve the

80
character of the soldiers, magistrates, or any one
concerned in the preservation of the peace, from
all imputation. While you were firing, were
stones thrown or not ? I did not perceive. When
did the hands first begin to give overwork ? Not
till Friday morning, the very day before this firing. And when did they resume? On Monday.
Now what I want to know is this, that with the
exception of that Friday and Saturday, was there
any general interruption ? No. Was there any

END

interruption at all, till Aitkin and Challenger
came and attended that meeting ? No. Had there
been any general interruption of work? Yes, on
Friday morning the Preston mob turned out.
When did you expect Aitkin and Challenger to
come ? On Friday night. What was the day of
the month on which the firing was? On Saturday
morning, the 13th of August.
It being now seven o'clock, the Court adjourned
to the following morning.

OF SECOND

DAYS

TRIAL.

TRIAL OF FEARGUS

O'CONNOR., ESQ,

AND OTHERS.

THIRD

DAY,

Friday, March 3rd, 1843.

IN.,consequenfce of Mr. BARON ROLFE having arranged this morning to dispose of a cha'rge of murder, the resumption of the evidence., in the prosecution of the
(hartists did not take place till nearly twelve o'clock.

The LEARNED JUDGE took his seat in the Nisi Prius Court, at twelve
(clock, when the J ury, in the case of "The Queen against FeartruO'Connor and
Others," vas called over.
Before the evidence was resumed,-The ATTORPN1NEY-GENERAL stated to his Lordship, that, having carefully
looked over the depositions as affecting John Wilde, one of the defendants, who crossexamined the witness Buckley on the previous day, and it having appeared that lie
took no part in the Chartist question, he (the Attorney-General) had come to the
conclusion,

in concurrence with his Learned Friends, not to offer any further evi-

dence against Wilie.
A verdict of Acquittal was accordingly taken.
The same course was adopted With regard to Thomas Pitt, another of the defendants.
On the application of Mr. O'CONNOR, all witnesses who had arrived since the
previous day, except those to character and formal m-atter, were ordered out- of
Court.

The AT'TORNEY-GENERAL made can application to the Court with refereince
to the attendance of the Rev. John TIaylor, Incumbent of Duckinfield, who wished to
offer evidence as to the character of John Crossley, one of the defendants. It would
be inconvenient for the Rev. Gentleman to he detained in Lancaster over Sunday,
and the Learned Gentleman according~ly proposed that the evidence of Mr. Taylor
should then be taken.
The Rev. Genthv~man was sworn, and he cgave a very
favourable opinion of the character of Crossley) as a peaceable and orderly mian..

82
JOSEPII HIBBERT, examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Are you clerk to the
magistrates at Hyde ? I am, along with Mr.
Edward Clarke. How long have you been so ?
Fifteen or sixteen years.
Have you resided
during that time, or the greater part of it, at
Hyde? All the time. During any part of the
month of August, was Hyde in a disturbed state ?
It was. At what time did that begin ? About
the 7th or 8th of August. How long did that
continue ? It continued at least six weeks.
What sort of a place have you there to put your
prisoners in ? We have a strong-built "lockWere persons
up," erected by the county.
confined there during the time of those riots?
No, sir; the magistrates did not consider it safe.
Did the magistrates assemble from day to day ?
They did. Who is your high constable? Joseph Little is our special high constable. How
long has he been so ? Nearly a year. Do you
mean that he has now been a year there, or
that he had been a year at the time those disturbances began ? I am not clear as to the time,
but I think it is rather more than a year now.
Was it his duty to mike reports from time to
time, to the magistrates, of what he witnessed
taking place? It was: he was expressly ordered
so to do. Had he been in the habit of doing
that before those disturbances began ? He has
done it occasionally. Have you been present
when he made his reports to the magistrates
from time to time, during the riots ? I have.
Did you ever see that book before ? [Handing
Little's notes to witness.] I have, sir. What
is that book, and when have you seen it before ?
I have seen it laid before the magistrates, in
their office. You have seen it frequently at the
office-your office, I think ? Yes, my office,
where the magistrates met. I have seen it laid
before the magistrates at their meeting. You
know the book well ? Yes, I have frequently had
it in my hand. Is that the real book which the
special high constable used for the purpose of
making his reports from day to day, before the
magistrates? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Mr.
Hibbert, you are clerk to the magistrates at
Hyde ? Yes. And Little is the special high
constable of Hyde ? Yes. He copies notes into
that book, and it is his duty to lay the state of
the town before the magistrates? Yes. Do you
think himnt as competent an authority for that
purpose as any other ? I do. You do. Do you
think that he would be likely to come to proper

conclusions as to about the time the disturbances commenced and ceased? Yes. Do you
hink that would be an important part of his
duty ? Yes, I think it would. How long do you
think it was from the commencement of the
disturbances to their conclusion ? About six
weeks. What time did you find that Leach was
missing from Hyde ? I don't recollect. You
must try. The constable tried for several weeks
before he got him.
Commencing from what
period ? I cannot say, sir. Did they look for
him on the 12th of August ? I think very likely.
Did they on the 16th ? I cannot say. Has he
been at Hyde since the 20th of August ? I believe not; I have not heard of him. Was Hyde
restored to a perfect state of tranquillity after
Leach had absconded ? It was not. It was not
perfectly tranquil after Leach left it ? I believe
it was not tranquil from the 7th of August till
the 21st of September-six weeks. Do you
think Little had been in error one month as to
the time Hyde was disturbed ? I should think
not. At what time did you appear to give evidence before the magistrates ? I did not appear
at all. I went to Stockport-I beg your pardon. Did you appear at Stockport in your capacity of clerk to the magistrates, at the time
Little deposed against the prisoners on their
trial? I don't know who the prisoners arc.
Woolfenden, Leach, and Challenger. Are you
aware what gave rise in the first instance to the
disturbances in the neighbourhood of Hlyde ? I
know that great bodies of people came from
other towns about the -7thHave you heard
that the hands-The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
beg Mr. O'Connor will allow the witness to fi.
nish the answer, and not ask what he has heard,
unless it is of that species which he considers
evidence.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I do not, Mr. AttorneyGeneral. [To the witness.] Were you aware
that the hands of the several mills were then
under notice to quit work? No.
You were
clerk to the magistrates and were present when
some of the prisoners were brought up, and
never heard on one of those occasions that the
hands were under notice? No.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--My lord, I
don't know when this is to end, if the witness
is to be asked what he has heard, not only at
the time, but what he afterwards heard as a
matter passing before the magistrates. It is not
evidence, and I am obliged to gave notice, after

what I heard yesterday, (when I gave a certain
degree of latitude to Mr. O'Connor, not desiring
to shut out whatever might be thought necessary) that I must in future object to the witness stating what he has heard a long time
afterwards.
want the witness to
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I
state, not what he heard a long time afterwards,
but what was given in evidence in his presence
before the magistrates.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-We cannot
have evidence second hand.
The JUDGE :-He can't give evidence except
as to what he knows of his own knowledge.
Mr. O'CONNOR [To witness] :-Then, when
did they begin to return to their work ?-At what
time did the turn out begin to cease, of your
own knowledge? About the 21st of September
or thereabouts. You don't keep notes of anything that passes; your business is to act as
clerk to the magistrates? No. Would you say
that the evidence of Little, who keeps notes,
would be better than yours, as to when the disturbances took place ?
The JUDGE :-Your observation may be
strong to the jury, but it is a matter of evidence
not of observation that one man keeps notes,
and another does not.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Here we have two witnesses from the same place; one who kept no
notes swears that the disturbances were continuing to the 21st of September, and the other,
who had notes, swears that the disturbances
ceased about the 20th of August.
The JUDGE :-He keeps no notes and Little
does. Now, your observation is fitted more to
the jury, as to which of the witnesses is more
likely to be deserving of credit.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - Has any
other defendant a wish to ask any questions ?
[No answer.]
Re-examinedby theATTORNEY-GENERAL:
-Now, Hibbert, will you tell me ?
RICHARD OTLEY :-I wish to ask a question. I merely wish to ask him if he heard of
any distress in Hyde, previous to, or at the time
of the outbreak ? I heard of no particular distress.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :---That was the
very question I was about to put, my lord; you
may stand down.
JOHN BROOKS was next sworn.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-1 wish to ask this witness
if he has been in court to hear the evidence ?
No, sir.

Examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL :Are you bookkeeper and manager to Mr. Platt ?
Yes. Where are his premises ? In Stalybridge.
Is it a mill or factory, or what ?-Describe what
it is. It is a cotton mill.
The JUDGE :-A cotton mill do you call it?

Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-On Monday
the 8th of August, do you remember any mob
coming to the mill? Yes. At about what time ?
A little before 9 o'clock in the morning, on
Monday, the 8th of August. Can you give any
notion of the number of persons who came to
the mill? I can't give any number, the street
was full. Could you say whether there were
some hundreds ? I should think thousands fron
the appearance of the crowd. Where were you
at the time the mob was there ? I was in the
mill yard, and had an intimation that the mob
was there. What did you do? I, together with
the overlooker of the mill, got outside just before they came up to the place; and the overlooker locked the door. Did you say anything
to the people ? I asked them what they wanted.
What answer did they give? They said they
wanted the hands. What did you say to that ?
I asked what for ? our hands are satisfied with
their present wages, and don't want to come out.
Well, what answer did you get to that ? They
said " we will have them out ; they must go
with us to get our rights." Well, what happened then ? I said, "If our hands come out
they will not go with you; we will start again
to-morrow morning, and go to work.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, I asked the Attorney-General if he pinned any of the defendants to the spot? and I understood him to say
that he could not do so by this witness. I say
that this conversation will not be evidence, unless these defendants were there. The presence
of the 4efendants is necessary to make any par.
ticular thing. which may have occurred at that
place, evidence; but this is a transacton with
which the defendants had nothing whatever to
do.
The JUDGE :-The counts of the indictment
charge the defendants with conspiring with
divers other evil-disposed persons, by threats and
intimidation, to other peaceably-disposed persons to stop the labour employed by divers sub.
jects of her Majesty, thereby causing great
alarm, &c. The thing to be proved is, that
evil-disposed persons did stop the engines, &c.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I apprehend that particular
conversations, occurring in a particular mannez

the defendants on the record not being present,
cannot be given in evidence.
The JUDGE :-The particular act proved here
is, the mob said, "We must have your hands
out ;" and the witness replied, " Our hands are
not going out, and they shall start."
Mr. DUNDAS :-My observation is, that if
the mob is doing an act, and that act given in
evidence, that act must afterwards be conducted
to the knowledge of the defendants in some
way. But I understood from the AttorneyGeneral that the defendants were not present at
this meeting.
was
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: -That
not my admission, my Lord; I said I was not
in a condition to show that the defendants were
present on this occasion, but I justify the evidence as referring to an act done, and the
expressions used will explain what that act was.
The JUDGE :- An act is said to be done,
and the defendants are not proved to be present
Whether an act is done by words, as it often is,
or by gestures, is immaterial, "we shall start
the
engxaination resumed-morrow.
- WITNESS -" We

receiving the same wages that they had received
for sometime ? Yes; I took a note of that fact.
They are receiving more wages now than they
were twenty-five years ago. What I want to
know is this:-Had they at that moment, at
Platt's mill, the same wages that they had received for some weeks before ? The weekly
hands were. Probably some gentlemen here
may understand what weekly hands mean-I do
not; explain ? The spinners receive weekly
wages, and other hands do not; there was Co
alteration in the wages for some years before,
except a trifling advance. And, now, with respect to the spinners who work by the piece ?
In August, 1840, they suffered a reduction of
ten per cent. With that reduction of ten per
cent., how much could a spinner earn by the
day, or by the week ? From thirty-two to
thirty-six shillings; but the average will be
about thirty shillings. You are the book-keeper,
and the general manager? Yes. Was anybody
getting less than twenty-two shillings a-week at
e
hing
tntw
tt
e
that time ? t I don't remember anything below
that; and if below that, they were not producing the quantity of work probably that they
ought to do.

And some of them, you say, had

shall start the engines to.mprrow morning, and as high as thirty-six shillings a-week, according
our hands will all come to their work." They to the quantity of work they could produce ?
'p.11o
,, ,
....
1...
replied, "Neither your mills, nor any other v... a
mills shall work till we get our rights."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : -What next
passed? I said, "it is very wrong in you to
attempt to force the hands to leave their employment, when they themselves are unwilling
to leave it, and are satisfied with their wages."
The JUDGE :-You said it was wrong to stop
the people when they were not willing to stop ?
Yes, my Lord.

;

eCS

ann

accor

ng

og

e

seoe

m

s.

How many hands were employed at that mill ?
About three hundred in all. I believe you have
no weavers? No.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-As I
understood you, Platt's mill is at Stalybridge ?
Yes. Do you know Bayley's mill ? Yes. How
far is Platt's from Bayley's mill ? Platt's mill
and Bayley's mill are adjoining each other.
Platt's new mill is about 300 yards from Bayley's.
You have spoken of what was going on at
Platt's mill,-very likely you know what was
going on at Bayley's mill? I cannot speak to
that particularly. Do you know that there was
a reduction of 25 per cent. on the wages ? No.
What is your name? John Brooks. Well, do
you say that you are an overlooker of a mill,
and that in a mill within twenty-three yards of
you, you don't know whether there was a reduction of 25 per cent. on the wages ?-Have you
heard of any reduction ?
The JUDGE :--Ie says he does not know,
he heard.
you cannot ask him as to

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : - What did
they next do? They said, "It is a lie ; we will
have them out." They began to jostle me about,
and said they would force me to unlock the
door. Well, you were talking about the key,
or opening the door? The crowd threatened
that if the doors were not opened, and that very
soon, and the hands turned out, they would
Was the door opened ?
break the windows.
The door was opened, and a large door belonging to the yard was opened from the inside.
What did the mob then do ? They rushed
into the yard, and by that time a great many of
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, it has been given
the men came in, and they sent a deputation
through the mill, to see if all hands were turned in evidence before.
The JUDGE :-Well, how can he know what
out; they then left the premises. I would ask
you, in point of fact, were your weekly people he has not heard ?

what

Mr. DUNDAS:--It was given in evidence
before by my friend himself.
The JUDGE:-Well, there was many a thing
said on both sides not quite regular.
Mr. DUNDAS :-[To Witness] Do you know
whether Bayley's mills were then closed ? No.
Do you not know for a thing certain, that
Bayley's hands were not working during the
greater part of August ? I have nothing to do
with Bayley's mills.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I will admit
the fact.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I want the fact from this
witness.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- Well, then,
you must have it regularly.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Was the mill stopped during
the month of August ? I have not the least doubt
but it was stopped during the month of August,
but I cannot be exact as to the precise time, I
do not put the question as to the exact time.
How long was it stopped? About a week, at
least, after ours. Do you know that it was kept
closed for a month ? I cannot speak to that,
positively. Was there any damage done to your
property? No.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:- Did
you pay the wages ? Yes. How much did you pay
each Saturday night ? Something over 3001. How
much over ? Perhaps from 3101. to 3201. People?
No, pounds. The amount varies from 3001. to
3201. We have about 300 hands. Do you pay all
the hands ? The spinners pay the piecers. How
many piecers to the spinner of the double-decked
mule? On some of them we have eight. How
many of these doubled-decked mules may you
have ? We have five double-decked mules. Three
of them require eight piecers each to serve them,
and the two others require seven each. How
many single-decked mules have you ? Twentyseven pair. How many piecers engaged on these
twenty-seven pair of single-decked mules ? Four
piecers to each. How many spinners have you?
Thirty-five. You have 300 hands in all? About
that. And only thirty-five are spinners ? There
may be one or two over. Then out of the 300
hands employed, it was only these thirty-five
spinners whose wages averaged from 36s. the
highest, to 22s. the lowest ? Yes, that is the net
wages. Now, sir, out of the 22s. the minumum,
what does each spinner pay to his piecers? Nothing. He has that net after paying his piecers.
I want to know the gross sum you pay him ?
We pay him by the piece, and he has 22s. clear

when he has paid his piecers. How much money
do you pay the spinners who work a singledecked mule?
The JUDGE :--That naturally depends on the
quantity of the work. Witness :-Yes, my Lord.
Mr. O'CONNOR:- If a man works a fair
week's work, how much will he have ? I can tell
you exactly how much he will have in the new
mill. A spinner gets for the stated amount of
work six guineas in the fortnight. There is ten
per cent. off that. Are there any other deductions ? 28. a week off for gas. That is 4s. in the
fortnight-that reduces it to 51. 10s.
The JUDGE:-To 51. 9s. 6d.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Thank you, my Lord.
How much does a man earn who works a fair
day's work at a double-decked mule? The amount
of wages a man employed at a double-decked mule
should earn in a fortnight is 101. 13s.-What
deductions are there off that ? But we have different sized mules. What deductions are made from
the 10!. 13s.-say for the average size ? About
20 per cent. and 3s. aweek for gas, my Lord, from
a double-decked mule.
The JUDGE:-You are rather fast. Do you
say a man at a double-decked mule, working a
single week, will earn 101. 13s.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-A fortnight, my Lord.
WITNESS:-You ought not to say that; I
told you I was not certain.
The JUDGE :-Well, you may not be accurate. It will be more, my Lord-there are different sized mules.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Well, how much? It will
be more than 111. for a fortnight-it will probably
be 131. Then you pay them by the fortnight ?
Yes? Then when you said 3101. you meant by
the fortnight? Yes. And not by the week ? No.
Now, sir, what deductions are there from the 131.
a spinner earns in a fortnight? 20 per cent. and
3s. a week for gas.
The JUDGE :-That is 20 per cent. and 6*.
for gas ? Yes.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Are there any other
deductions ? There are no other deductions.
Are there fines ? None, except for spoiled work.
Are there any fines for not being punctual as to
time ? No. What is the greatest amount of deduction you have stopped from any of the hands
for spoiled work during the three months any one
Saturday-about ? It might be in the teens of
shillings from oneman. From 12s. to 208. ? How
much from the whole ? I cannot say You pay
all in cash, I believe? Yes. Never in anything
else ? No. A double-decked mule takes eight
pieces, and you have 300 hands at work, and the
amount of wages paid to these is about 1551. per
week? Yes. And thirty-five of these hands earn
from 22.. to 36s. per week-that, I presume,

86
would leave about 7s. per week, upon an average,
for the remaining 265 hands ?
The JUDGE:-Taking the average at 30s. a
week for the spinners, it would leave 1031. 10s.
for the remainder. which is about 7s. a week.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Then 265 of the other
hands will be only earning 7s. or 7s. 6d. per week?
That will not be right, for there are a considerable
number of small piecers from thirteen to sixteen
years of age, but you said hands. Now, do the
spinners, who employ the piecers, make any deductions from their own hands ? I am not aware
of that. Don't you know it? No. Well, then,
I won't press that question. Are you aware that
at that period the distress at Ashton was great ?
Yes. Are you aware that committees were appointed by the shopkeepers to take the distress of
the country into their consideration? That I am
aware of. Do you know, to your own knowledge,
that several masters had served notice upon their
hands, that they should have no more work unless
they submitted to a large reduction of their
wages ? I cannot speak positively to that question. You say your old mill adjoins Bayley's
mill, and your new mill is 300 yards off Bayley's?
Yes. Now, in coming to your work in the morning, whose mill do you appear at first? That is
just as it happens to be. Do you remember
Friday, the 5th of August? No, I remember nothing particular about it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord,
I fixed the question of Bayley's mills stopping on
the 5th of August, and there is no doubt of the
fact. It is better not to ask the witness, who has
no knowledge of his own about it.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Suppose this man's business brought him to the mill adjoining Bayley's, and suppose he found the gates closed
against the men, would not that be evidence ?
The JUDGE :-If we wanted evidence, but
that fact is admitted. I take it now, once for all,
that Bayley's mills were stopped on Friday, the
5th of August.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-You say that your large
gates were opened from the inside, to the turnouts? Yes.
The JUDGE:-That is on the 8th.

Mr. O'CONNOR:-Yes, my Lord. That is
Platt's mill, of which Brooks is the book-keeper
and manager. [To the witness]-Did they force
the gates open ? No, they were opened by orders
from the masters through fear. Not by the master, but by his orders? I don't know, I was outside. How did you know then by whose orders
they were opened ? I heard my master say so.
Cross-examined by JAMES LEACH, of Manchester, defendant :-I think you stated, that you
now pay the same wages which you paid twentyfive years ago-as much, or mo:e ? Yes. To what

description of hands do you pay the same wages?
We had one carder, at that time receiving 17s. a
week; now, two carders, 11. 7s. a week; twenty.
five years ago we had a stripper and a grinder,
one 12s. and the other l1s. a week; frame-tenters,
8s. 6d. a week. Now we have one grinder, 13s.;
five grinders, each 14s.; strippers, at piece-work,
make from 13s. to 17s. per week. First-class
frame-tenters, 10s. a week; second-class, 9s. ;
third-class, 8s. 6d. How many hands have you
employed ? I don't know the number exactly.
You are the manager of the mill, and yet you
don't know the number of hands employed; and
you pay the wages of those hands, and yet you
don't know their exact amount ? That is very
possible.
The JUDGE :-It may not be material what
were the exact wages in former times. I have not
taken down the prices-is it material ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Yes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-Then give me the wages as
they were twenty-five years ago.
WITNESS:-The description of the workmen
to which we paid the same wages as we did twentyfive years ago, are as follows -We had at that
time 1 carder, 17s. a week; a stripper and grinder,
one at 12s. and another at 11s., but I don't know
exactly; one frame-tenterer, 8s. 6d. We have
,
now one carder at 19s.; two carders, each 27s.;
one grinder, 13s.; five grinders, each 14s.; strippers now on piece-work make from 13s. to 17s.;
first-class frame-tenters, 10s.; second-class, u. ;
third-class, 8s. 6d.
JAMES LEACH:-You stated to the Court,
that you are not aware of the number of hands
employed.-Are you aware of the number of hands
who were employed twenty-five years ago ? I
don't know exactly. I was not in the concern at
the time; but I happenedjust to take these wages
from the books
The JUDGE :-Then you don'tknow what the
wages were twenty-five years ago at all.
JAMES LEACH :-Hdw long have you been
a manager of the mill you are speaking of? Twenty
years. How many hands in the warehouse ? I
was there twelve years ago only as a warehouseman. I don't know how many hands there were,
and the concern has considerably increased. Do
you think there are now as many hands in the
card-room doing the same amount of work ? I do
not think there are. You have stated that you
pay the same wages that you paid twenty-five
years ago for the work then done; now, what are
the counts of the twist, or the weft, you may be
spinning? From 80's to 160's. What were you
paying twenty-five years ago for spinning 80's ?
I don't know. How then do you know that you
were paying the same then that you are paying
now ? A person is earing as much money now

87
as he did then, but I do not know how many
hands there might have been, or how much each
might do. As a paymaster of that mill, I ask you
how much you'were paying seven years ago ?What were you paying seven years ago ? For
what number? 80's. That I do not remember.
Well, I don't ask you as to the particular countWhat wages were you paying ? I tell you the net
amount at present. Of course you tell us that your
spinners now earn 36s.; but don't you know that
there are spinners in Stalybridge working for 12s.
or 14s. a week ? I have nothing to do with other
masters.' You have spoken about double-decked
machines-have you any treble-decked machines
in your place ? No, we have not any. Have you any
self-acting machines ? No. What number of spindles was one of your spinners spinning ten, twelve,
or twenty years ago ? We had spinners ten years
ago spinning on 1300 spindles. What were they
spinning on twenty years ago? 648. Twenty
years ago they were spinning on 648, and ten
years ago on 1300. What number are they
spinning on now? They try it as low as about
1000? Well, what height do you go to?
The double-deckers, some of them, run to
2000 now, and they were at 600, twenty years
ago. Are they getting more money now for
working the 2000, then they were receiving
twenty years ago for the 600? Yes. How many
spinners did you employ twenty years ago ? I
don't remember exactly. There was a new mill
commencing then, and I don't remember exactly
the number. Have you a room in your mill,
where four spinners have been at work any time
since you became a manager? No; we had two
in them. I am aw re what you are referring to.
You know how many spinners you had twenty
years ago ? I don't remember. How many had
you ten years ago ? That I don't know. How
many have you now ? Thirty-five. Of course
the mills being enlarged, are capable of employing a greater number of spinners. Do you think
that three men now are turning out as much work
as one did then?
The JUDGE:-I do not know the object of
this examination.
JAMES LEACH :-My object is to shew that
the hands are not receiving anything like the
wages they originally received. He stated that
they are receiving the same wages which they
received twenty years ago. I know they ai'e not
receiving half the wages for the same amount of
work.
WITNESS :-I maintain it, that they are receiving the same net wages.
The JUDGE :-What is meant is, that they,
in fact, produce a greater quantity now than formerly.
G

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: -That
i
very likely.
The JUDGE :-That may be.
JAMES LEACH :-On each of your double.
decked machines, you have 2000 spindles to one
spinner, and twenty years ago a spinner worked
only 648. Did you know that in 1840, spinners
were working 680 spindles, and in 1843, 2086
spindles? Where? In some of the mills in Stalybridge. I told you before, I did not know what
they were doing in other mills. Are they doing
it in your mill? There are alterations, but I can't
tell the exact time they took place. Is it not
customary for the managers and the masters to
consult together as to the wages they should pay ?
It is not so with us. You certainly appear to be
a strange exception to the general rule. You
don't know that in the mills in your district, the
spinners were working 2600 spindles, and only
getting 9s. a week ? I cannot answer that. You
state, that your workmen average 36s. per week.
I believe it would be only 11. Os. 8d. in the fortnight according to what you subsequentlystated,
that is 10s. 4d. a week.
The JUDGE:-Yes, you are right in that; it
would be 10s. 4d. a week.
JAMES LEACH :-Do the hands live in
houses belonging to the firm? Some do, and
others do not. Is it not customary when you
give employment to individuals, to compel them
to live in houses belonging to the firm ? It is expected that the houses will be filled, but we do
not comjel the hands to do so. What follows if
that expectation be not fulfilled ? Why, nothing
particular follows. Does anything occur that is
not very particular ? We have instances in our
mill, where the hands left the houses, and we
have houses now standing empty, that are in connection with the mills. What description of
houses are they ? Why, one of them is a large
house. But generally, are they double houses
with two rooms on the floor ? Yes. What are the
rents weekly ? They vary from 3s. 4d. to about 4s.
weekly. These rents, I presume, are stopped in
the counting-house,when the wages are paid? Yes
The rent is stopped whether the man is receiving
the wages or not? In some instances it is not
stopped. The fact is, you secure the rent in the first
instance ? We did not do so during the turn-out.
That is because there was no wages to pay, is
it ? We did not secure the rent the first thing
after they went in. You got it back by instalments ? There was no rent paid-the first week
at all Is there any hands in your mill that you
pay 7s. or 88. a week to ? Yes. These hands live
in those houses; do they not ? I am not aware.
One of them does, I delieve. How; many houses
You are not await
have you ? Twenty-f, ,.

88
how many families there are in a house ? I am

The JUDGE :-I thought you said you had

not aware that there is more than one in any of houses connected with the mill ? Yes.
And
them. Then you stop 4s. a week, or 3s. 4d. there is one empty? Yes. It is nearly con.
from the wages you pay, whatever the wages nected with the mill; it is in family connexion.
may be; but you seem not to know that there -(Laughter.)
JAMES LEACH:-Do you know that when
are hands working in your mills, working only
for 7s. a week, from whom you take that a spinner in that distrIct comes to get work, a
rent ? I am not aware that we have one work- key is given to him, and then he has the rent of
ing at that price, and paying that rent. You the house to pay, whether he lives in it or not ?
will swear that you don't know that to be the I don't know. You don't know that when a
case? I do not. You swear you don't know, spinner comes to get employment at a mill, that
but will you swear that it is not the case ? I he finds the key of a door hung on the machine,
believe it is not the case. You won't swear and must take that key, no matter whether a
married or a single man, and pay the rent of the
that it is not the case -The JUDGE :---e cannot do more, if he house ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-It is time,
does not know it to be the case, than to say he
my Lord, to object to this kind of examination.
does not believe it to be the case.
JAMES LEACH:-Do you know that there I would practice the greatest forbearance before
has been a great deal of uneasiness in Staly- I should object to any question of any sort that
bridge, in consequence of the low wages paid to could, in the remotest degree, affect the case
the men ? My business is with our own men. I before the jury; but this enquiry may have no
have nothing to do with others. Of course I end, and it has nothing to do with the question
don't expect that you go about meddling in on the record.
JAMES LEACH :-My object was to show
other people's business: but by way of refreshthat the statement made by the witness, that
ing your memoryThe JUDGE -- Do you know that for some they were paying the same wages now, which
years past there has been great uneasiness in they were paying twenty-five years ago, was not
Stalybridge, in consequence of the operatives true.
The JUDGE :-In one sense both of you are
receiving little pay for their work ? I know there
true. The workman may be producing a greater
have been complaints among the operatives.
JAMES LEACH :-Did you hear any of quantity of goods for the same money; but then
those complaints twenty-five years ago? Yes, it may be with the same quantity of labour and
there were always complaints-they were always skill that he exercised twenty-five years ago, in
a grumbling set. I don't want to say of others earning the same amount of wages. What I
more than I say of myself. Are not the wages understand from the witness is this, that a workpaid now the lowest? No. Do you know that man employing the same quantity of labour and
houses of the same description you were speak- skill that he employed twenty-five years ago, has
ing of, are now let for from Is 6d. to Is. 9d. a as much earnings as he had then, but he may
week ? I know that a great many houses are give a greater quantity of produce.
paying under their value. A landlord told me
JAMES LEACH :-Is there not a great deal
that his houses were not paying 'what they more labour performed now in bringing forth
ought to do. Do you think that houses of the that produce? In some instances there is; in
description you were speaking of, are let under others there is not. There have been great imtheir value at Is. 9d. a week? I do. You think provements in machinery, which make the work
that is not much out of 7s. or 8s. wages? I easier, Is it easier to work double-decked mahave nothing to do with wages, but I know that chines, than machines with six hundred spindles
that is not remuneration for such houses. Do you in them ? That depends on the construction of
know whether there are not a great many houses the machines.
Under any construction? It
empty in Stalybridge ? Yes. Those houses do depends a great deal on the number of counts
not belong to the manufacturers, I presume? that a person is spinning; the hardness of the
There are many cf their houses empty. Are work depends, in a great measure, on the numthere any of your houses empty ? There is one I ber of counts one is spinning.
empty. But there are a great number tnpty in
The JUDGE :-That is the number of skeins
the village ? Yes.
or hanks to the pound ? Yes.

89
JAMES LEACH:-I wish to understand
from the witness, why it is that whilst these
machines have so rapidly increased within the
last twenty-five years, the wages have sunk, at
least forty-five per cent.?
The JUDGE :-He says, what he means by
wages sinking, they have sunk, if you estimate
by the quantity of produce; hut they have not
sunk, if you estimate them by the quantity of
labour and skill employed in producing.
JAMES LEACH:-When your hands turned
out, you did not stop the rent of the houses,
you say; what are you now stopping from those
who have only seven shillings or eight shillings
a.week ? I told you we had no hands at that
wages that we were stopping rent from. Then,
they are all the better paid workmen that are
in your houses, and you have not stated that the
other houses in the neighbourhood are, generally,
of low rents, or empty ? I stated that they are
empty; that some are under their value, and
that the landlords ought to have more for them.
But if the landlord can afford to let his houses
for one shilling and sixpence a-week, cannot the
employer let them at the same rate to the hands
in his mill ?
The JUDGE :-This is quite interminable.Does any other defendant wish to ask any questions ? [No answer.]
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
-You say that a large gate was opened, and the
mob went in-What do you mean by a large
gate ? They are the large doors belonging to the
mill-yard, at which the carts enter. Are these
gates open for persons to go in and out? No,
sir. Is it unusual to open the large gates to let
in a crowd of persons? Why, we don't open
them for the mill hands. I think you said the
crowd pressed upon the gates, and threatened?
Yes. In what way did they threaten? They
threatened to break the windows. Had they
done that before the great gate was opened?
Yes.
The JUDGE :-Are there 300 men employed
who receive this 3101. a fortnight ? Yes. Does
that include men, women, and children ? It
includes the whole. What aged children are
employed there? From 13 years old and upwards
-a large proportion of them are 16 years of age.
Then, your average of 10s. 4d. includes women
and children ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I wish to ask
if many of the skilful workmen have not their
own children employed in the mill?

k.

The JUDGE :-Of course; if a man is wor
ing in the mill with some of his children it does
not follow that each of them has to pay 3s. or
4s. a week for rent. The deduction for the
rent of a house is only from one occupier, and
the man living in it may have his wife and
children working in the mill.
JAMES BRADSIIAW examined by Mr.
HIILDYARD:-What are you ? I am a millowner in Stockport. Were you in Stockport on
the 11th of August last? I was. Did a mob
enter the town that day ? Yes. What did they
do ? The body of the mob approached my mill
on that day about half-past twelve o'clock.
What number was in the mob-speaking roundly ?
Several thousands I should think. Had they
1
anything in their hands ? They had sticks. I
believe your mill is situated near St. Peter's.
square ? Yes. Were you there yourself ? I was.
When the mob approached what did they do ?
They came to me to the lodge door where I was
standing, and demanded admission for the pur.
pose of turning the hands out. Did you refuse Y
to allow them to enter the mill ? I did. Did
you give any reason ? I said it was the dinner
hour, and refased to admit them, as the men
were not there. What reply did they make to
that ? They said they should go in and look.
What was their conduct when you refused them
permission ? They were pushing to come in, and 1
I told them that they had nothing to do with r
me or my men. Did you lock the door? I Y
pushed them back and locked the door. On
that, did they commence an attack on the mill?
Yes, they broke the lodge windows, and pade
an attack on the gates. They threw stones and
sticks while attempting to force the gates.
Were the windows demolished by that ? Yes,
entirely, framework and all. Did they at last
succeed in forcing the door ? Yes, they broke it
all to pieces. And having done so, of 'course
they entered into the mill-yard ? Yes. Was any
violence offered to yourself ? Yes, very considerable. Just state how you were dealt with. I
was surrounded by a large portion of the mob,
and very severely beaten with sticks by them, so
much so that I was, in consequence, confined to
my bed for several days.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-You
resided, Mr. Bradshaw, at Stockport ? I did.
Do you know that there was any damage done
at any other mill in Stockport? I heard of no
violence being done to any other master except
me. You are speaking now, I think, of what

t

occurred on the 11th of August? Yes. Were
you much about the town on the days immediately oefore that ? Yes. Do you happen to
know the state of feeling and excitement in
which the town then was ? There was very little
excitement in Stockport before that day. Did
you happen to see any placards on the walls of
Stockport before that day ? I have no recolleetion of it.. There has been, I believe, a good
deal of angry discussion in Stockport, between
those called Chartists, and the Corn-law repealers ? Yes, but I don't know anything of it
myself. You don't belong to the Anti-corn-law
League ? No, I know nothing about it. He is,
my Lord, the only person, whose person or property was damaged. You know that there are
a great many others, there who have taken a
very prominent part in the movements of the
Anti-corn-law League ? Yes, there are, many
there who have taken a very prominent part in
the Anti-corn-law question, but I cannot say of
my own knowledge, that they belong to the
Anti-corn-law League.-l have not seen them
'taking any part in their meetings, but from conversation I know them to be favourable to that
body. Have you ever been at a public meeting?
Yes. Did you see any one of the League taking
part in that meeting? Yes. Is he a mill-owner?
'Yes.
The JUDGE :-He took part, in favour of
abolition of the corn laws? Yes, how long
ago? About two years ago.-I never was at a
meeting since.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-That is all.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
-You say your mill was attacked on the IIth?
It was. Had any other mill been attacked the
day before that? Not that I am aware of. Was
your mill the first that was attacked? The first
attacked in Stockport, because no resistance that
I am aware of, was offered by any others. It
was not the first that was entered? No, they
entered several other mills in Stockport, but this
After what
was the only one that resisted.
occurred at your mill, was there any resistance
anywhere ? Not that I am aware of.
JOE COOPER examined by Mr. WORTLEY:
-What are you? I am a cotton spinner. Do
you live in the township of Chisworth ? Yes.
Is that near Glossop ? Yes. What business do
you carry on there ? The cotton spinning. Are
any of your relations cotton spinners with you ?
My father is the owner and proprietor of a mill.
Heave you a brother also assisting in the mill ?

Ihe

Yes. Do you remember a mob coming to your
mill? Yes. When was the first time they came ?
On the 11th of August. Had you been present
at any meeting in Glossop before that? No, sir.
Well, on the 11th of August, what number of
persons came? I cannot speak exactly: from
100 to 150. What did they do ? They did nothing, but said, if we did not turn the hands
out, they would rake the fires out. They had
sticks in their hands. Were your hands then
working ? Yes. What happened when they said
that? We stopped working. And what became
of the hands? They left the mill and went in
various directions. Did the mob then go away ?
Yes. Did the mob come on the premises at all?
Yes, they came into the mill-yard. When the
hands went out they went away?. Yes. Did the
hands come back to work again? They came
part of the way.-We did not want them to
start again, as the mob said they would turn
back if the men started again. What do you
mean by their coming part of the way ? They
came down towards the mill.
The JUDGE :How long afterwards? Half
Some of the hands came back ? Yes.
an hour.
Mr. WORTLEY:-And you stopped them?
Yes. Why ? Because we thought if they began
work again, the mob would stop them, and the
mob had said so. Did the hands afterwards
come back and begin to work ? Not the same
day, but they did some days after. We began
again on the 24th of August, at the request of
You were going to say that the
the hands.
hands came almost every day ?
The JUDGE :-From the 11th to the 24th
they came. Almost every day from the 11th to
the 24th, to see when you were starting, as they
wished to begin again ? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-During that interval, between the I th and 24th of August, did you
attend a meeting at Glossop ? Yes. What day
was that ? On the 23rd of August. Where was
that meeting held ? At the back of the Townhall. How many persons were there? A great
many hundreds. Do you know a man of the
name of Lewis? Yes. Did you see Lewis at that
meeting? Yes, I believe I did.
The JUDGE :-What is his Christian name?
John Lewis.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Do you know he was John
Lewis, or no? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Did he make a speech?
Yes. Did he say anything about Manchester ?
Yes. What did he say? Hlie said he attended

91
several meetings at Manchester. What meetings? Meetings of delegates. Did he read any
papers ? Yes, sir. Did he say what these papers
were that he was reading? I understood him to
say that they were resolutions ; and one or two
of them were addresses from the workmen.
Were they written papers, or printed papers
that he read? They were printed, I believe.
You say they were printed? I believe so. Could
you say whether they were printed or not ? Yes,
they were like placards. Who was in the chair?
James Coe. Did he make a speech ? Yes. Did
he say anything about France ? Yes. What did
he say ? He reminded them of the three glorious
days of France, when, though the streets flowed
with blood, property was respected; and told
them to be so here. He advised them to be
peaceable, did not he ? Yes ; that was before he
alluded to France, and then he said that. How
many days after that was it that the mob came
to your premises ? The day after ; the 24th.
Were your hands at work then ? Yes, they had
come back then. About what number did the
mob consist of that came to your works on the
24th ? About 300 or 400. Did you recognize
in that mob any of the parties you had seen in
the meeting of the day before ? Yes, a great
number of them. Not any particular individual
that you can speak to, but you saw that they
were the same men, many of them ? Yes. What
did you do then ? My father met them in front
of the mill, and asked them what they wanted;
and they said they would have the hands turned
out, or they would pull the mill down.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Were you there to hear
your father ? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Were they armed, any of
them? Yes, sir. What with? A great many
had sticks. Before getting to the mill they
shouted very loudly, waved their sticks, and
said they would have the hands out, or pupl
down the mill. What next ? He attempted to
reason with them. Your father did ? Yes; but
they began to rush by him, and he then ordered
the engineer to stop the engines. Before that,
a good many of our hands had fled. What do
you mean by that? They went out of the mill,
and went away far fear of being injured. Did
the mob get on to the premises ? Yes. What
part of them? They went into the yard. How
did they get in ? They went round- the corner of
the mill to the yard; there is no yard gate.
Did they go to the mill at all? No; but they
would not leave till two of the mob who had

been in had searched. They insisted first on all
going in; but at last they consented to send
only two of their number through, for the purpose of searching. Were some men taken up
at your works, for that proceeding ? Yes. Did
you attend before the magistrates to be examined? Yes. Who went with you? My
brother Joseph. When did you go before the
magistrates against these men? On Monday,
the 29th of August. Who went with you ?
My father and my brother Joseph, John Howard,
and my uncle James Cooper. Were you examined before the magistrates ? I was not.
Who was? My brother and John Howard.
As you were going away from the place where
you were examined before the magistrates what
happened? They were leaving to go home, and
the mob came behind us and stopped up the
way between us and the inn to which we were
proceeding. The magistrates had been sitting
at the barracks, and the mob had been surrounding the barracks, while the trial was proceeding.
It was from that they came to stop up our way.
Tell us shortly what happened ? Why, they
began to stone us, and we looked to see if we
could not get back; but every avenue was
closed, and we could not get to the town again:
we were obliged to go forward. They continued
to stone us: we began to run, and they followed
us, stoning us all the way. They had nearly
killed my brother; but before that John Howard
had left us. He was very much frightened, and
ran through the fields in a different way from
that in which we went; we went to Mr. Howard's. You and your father, and brother and:
uncle? Yes. You went to your uncle Howard's?
No; to another gentleman of the same name.
The mob followed us, and surrounded the house.
Did your brother get to the house? No, sir.
How came that ? Mrs. Howard and her daughters
were very much frightened. Was he shut out?
Yes. What happened to him? I saw him that
evening, and he was then insensible. How long
was he in that' state? I think he was not sensible till the day after. How long was it until
he recovered? He was several weeks before his
wounds got well. Did not you see him 'till the
time you took refuge in Howard's ? No. What
time did you get into Howard's ? About halfpast two o'clock. How long after that was it
that you saw your brother? About half-past
six or seven o'clock. Where did you find him ?
I found him at home. In the state you have
described ? Yes. Very well.
Cro5s-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :
-Where

92
did you stand at that meeting ?-You told us
where John Lewis was; how near him were you?
About ten yards. Could you hear what was said
by him ? Yes. You told my friend, in answer to
a question, that Coe advised the meeting to be
peaceable? Yes. Were you near enough to hear
what was said when he gave them that advice?
Yes. Tell the jury what it was ? He said he had
been summoned as special constable, and was
liable to a penalty of 51. if he did not go, He
did not know that he was liable before, but he
would not molest them. He told the people to he
peaceable, and not molest the special constable,
because they could not help being sworn in.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-How
many hands do you employ, Mr. Cooper? Somewhere near 100. Now, I understood you to say,
though you explained it afterwards, that when
your hands returned again, you said you did not
want them at that time ? That was on the first occasion of the turn-out. Yes; after your hands
had been turned out, and went some distance with
the mob, they returned andcanted to resume
their work, and you said, " No, we don't want
you now ?"
The JUDGE :-They did not want them to
come back, because the mob would turn them out
again.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-You said you were within
ten yards of Lewis when he referred to the three
bloody days of France ? I never said so. It was
Coe that referred to France. Would you know
his exact words ?-Is this what he said :-" You
must wait," said Sir Robert Peel, "till February
-you must wait till March. You must wait till
the dog-days of next summer, when, perhaps, you
may have three such days as you have had in
Paris; but we will have hundreds of thousands of
troops to mow you down. This, I conceive, to
be the policy of the party."-Was that what you
heard ? I don't think it was. Was it this you
heard:-"' He had read the pages of history, and

had looked at the bloody scenes that had occurred
at the close of the last century upon the soil of
France. ' Ie saw that at that time the first cry of
the people was, ' Give us bread, and none of your
gabble.' They were led by forms in women's
guise, but of masculine energy, and called out in
the Court of the Tuilleries for immediate food;
for that they were dying, and, dying, would not
endure.it."-Was it like that ?-Was it equally
as exciting as that?-Is that worse than Coe's
language? Well, I should say it is.
THOMAS RHODES examined by Mr. POLLOCK:-Where do you live? I live at Brookfield, near Glossop. What are you? Iam a cotton manufacturer. Are you in business alone, or
in partnership? I am in business alone. Was
yo r mill at work on the 10th of August? Yes.

Do you remember a number of persons coming
to you that day? Yes. What direction did they
come from ? From the direction of Stalybridge
and Hyde. How many of them were there? The
number was not very large, sir. How many do
you think? The main body, that came from Stalybridge, went in another direction. How many
came to your mill ?-Perhaps-about ?- About
a couple of hundreds. Is yours a large mill? The
concern altogether, I think-perhaps it would
be necessary for me to explain the positionThe JUDGE :-No, no; is it large or small ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Is it moderate.
WITNESS:-Mr. Shepley is a near relative
of mine, and I occupy a portion of his mill.
Where the gates of the mill-yard closed when
these people came ? The mill-door was closed.
Did the people who came say anything? Yes.
What was it? They demanded that the hands
should be turned out. Did they do anything at
the gate ? I opened the door, seeing the crowd of
people outside, and they rushed in. What sort
of door was it-large or small? Small. Those
that rushed in had they anything in their hands ?
They were armed with large sticks. Did you
say anything to them? I told them there was no
necessity for them to use violence, as we would
stop without it. Did they say anything to that ?
Yes, sir. What was it? Notwithstanding our
having told them this, they rushed into the mill,
and drove the hands forcibly out. Did you hear
anything said after that ? When they saw all the
hands out of the mill, I heard them telling some
of them that if they found them doing anything
again, they would make them incapable of following their employment. Anything else? No,
sir. Then your hands went out that morning.
I believe after this time, there were several meetings in your neighbourhood ? Yes. Did you attend any of them ? Yes, I attended, on the 11th
of August, a meeting on Wedensough Green;
another on the 12th, and another on the 17th.
Was a man called Booth at that meeting on
the 17th.
The JUDGE :-What is his christian name?
I don't know, my Lord, they called him Booth.
I never saw the man before.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Did he make a speech?
Yes. Tell me, shortly, what he was talking
aboit ? He was speaking respecting the Charter
andMr. ATHERTON:-My Lord, before the
statement of Booth is given, it seems to me that
the point should be gone into, whether a simple
similarity of surname is to be considered a proof
of identity.
The JUDGE :-I cannot at this moment say
to what the examination may lead. They may

93
be assembled for some lawful purpose; let us the bishops; and said if they had so much fox
hear what they say and what the character of the working one day, how much did the working
classes deserve for working six ? Before they
meeting is.
Mr. ATHERTON:-The object of this in- broke up was it said what they were to do, and
dictment is to show, that threats and intimida- where they were to go. A man of the name of
tions were used by the defendants for the pur- Fairhurst stated, that the railway hands had bepose of causing a cessation of work; and I gan their work; and it was mentioned in the
ptsume it is now to be shown that some man of meeting that they should be stopped.
The JUDGE:-Was that decided? Yes.
the name of Booth did that.
Mr. POLLOCK :-I understood from what
The JUDGE :-It is quite another question
whether it will be brought home to Booth the you said, that they came to the conclusion to stop
defendant; but, you have got it that great bodies the railway hands who had commenced work ?
of people were going about turning out the work- Yes. When they left the ground which direction
people, using great violence, and sometimes did they go in ? In the direction of the railway.
turning out the hands, not using violence, but How far was this ground from the railway ? I
think it was a mile and a half in the way they
using threats.
Mr. ATHERTON:-It is open to the Crown went. There are two roads to it. but they took
to show that other persons used threats and vio- the longest. When did you begin work-again at
lence, but it is not evidence against any of the your mill ? We began work again on the 26th of
defendants, that some man of the name of Booth August. Had you any difficulty in getting your
I hands to come to their work again? No, sir; the
made a speech.
The JUDGE :-I cannot tell what it is to be major part of them expressed a willingness to
resume work whenever we wished to open the
till I hear it.
Mr. ATHERTON :-As part of the res geste mill.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I object to your going into
I don't care, but as a mere speechMr. POLLOCK :-Did Booth say anything what they said.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Did any people come to
about the royal household ? Yes; he had a small
piece of paper in his hand, and referred to the your mill the same day ? Yes.
The JUDGE :--What day ? The 26th,
expenditure of the royalhousehold, and told them
Mr. POLLOCK :-About what time of the
what the monarchy cost the country, and of the
wine which he was pleased to say the Queen day? About twelve o'clock. How many ? SeveraL
drank; he told them of all these things, and hundreds. Was the gate of the mill cosed at that
time ? I was not at the mill. Go to the time
what expense the monarch was to the country.
Mr. ATHERTON:--Was anything done when you were at the mill. We heard a ruafter these speeches were made ?-Did they do mourThe JUDGE: - Never mind the rumour.
anything ? They went for the purpose of turning
When you saw the mill tell what happened? I
the railway hands off.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Did you see them do that? came up on horseback, and the first thing I saw
I saw them going in that direction, and I after- was the men surrounding the door.
"Mr. POLLOCK :-What was the cry among
wards went there. You did not see them do
The JUDGEat-It is impossible to sever what the people outside at that time ? " Turn them
The JUDGE:-It is impossible to sever what out !-We will have them out !" And what did
brf
rAn
deedthe o
We
is said on these occasions from what is done.ou'
the door. A number of
is part of the thing itself. If they you do.? We defended
What is said
had been sworn in as special
are meeting every day, and sometimes violent our workpeople
day before; and we called them.
speeches are accompanied with acts, we must take constables the
it all as one continued series of transactions. I out, and they kept the mob off. How long did
cannot understand the one without having the the mob continue their attempts to get in ?
There were two attacks; the first attack might
other.
Mr. POLLOCK:-I was going to ask what have continued about anhouror more. The attack
in some measure abated, though the mob did not
he said about the expenses of the magistratesAfterwards more persons
did he say anything about them ? Yes; he said entirely move off.
the working classes could not obtain justice be- came and made a second attack. Did you succause the magistrates were composed chiefly of ceed in defending your mill? Yes, we kept them
the middle classes, and the working classes never
would get justice till the bench was composed
of men of their own class. Did he say anything
about the church ? Yes, sir; hliereferred to the
of
ais
nb * t n s,,,i ,
a , .
:.:
aintaisoILe

ri1

nn

w

mlt#3aa

klV

off. How long did the mill continue to work
off.er thatow long did the mill conthainue to workeatafter that? This mob dispered; having threatened to send a larger force if we continued to
Ilow long did you continutte to work after
I womrk.
.

v.

a

.

z

94
the mob dispersed? We continued to work till
Tuesday, the 30th of August. You were absent,
I believe, on the morning of Tuesday? Yes.
What time did you return ? About twelve o'clock.
What state did you find the mill in? I found the
windows of the mill demolished-framework and
all. The windows of my father-in-law's (Mr.
Shepley) house were also injured, and also
those of my own houses. The military was
there. I believe the mill is more commonly
known as Mr. Shepley's mill, than by your
name ? Yes; I only occupy a small portion of it,
Are you acquainted with the handwriting of
Lewis ? I have seen him write.-[A letter, purporting to be in the handwriting of Mr. Lewis,
was then handed to witness, who carefully examined it,J
The JUDGE :-Have you seen him write?
Yes, my Lord,-once. Does that enable you to
say whether you believe that to be his signature,
or not ? I believe this to be his signature. I
have seen writing frequently thathas been represented as his, but I have only seen him write
his name once.
Mr.POLLOCK:-From the acquaintance, such
as it is, which you have of Lewis's handwriting,
do you believe that letter to be in his handwriting ? I do. Look at the other two [handing them to witness]. I believe these two to be
his, but I have not the same confidence in them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
will not put them in now; I don't take them as
proved yet.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Who did you give that
letter to ? I believe I gave a letter to Mr. Part.
You were at a meeting on Mottram Moor, on
the 19th or 20th ? Yes; but whether it was on
the 19tl or 20th, I am not prepared to say.
Did you see a placard produced at that meeting? Yes. Would you know it again ? I should
if I read it. [The " Executive Placard" is
handed to witness] I have no doubt but this is
the same.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :--Where
did you see this placard? At the meeting on
Mottram Moor, Was it on the wall, or how ?
It was on a cart,.
The JUDGE ;:-Did you see it posted on a
wall? I saw it given to the chairman of the
meeting. Did he read it ? No, he was not able
to read it, but he handed it to a person named
France, and he read it.
Mr. DUNDAS:-That is the way you are
able to say it is the same ? Yes. You know it

by the hearing of the ear, and not by the seeing
of the eye. Did he hold it up that way [displaying the placard before the witness] ? No; it
would be a strange thing if he should read the
backside. How, then, do you know it, if you
did not see it? I know it by what I heard. I
heard the placard read, and consequently I can
say that, in substance, that is the same. Did
you see the face of it ? I cannot see what you
are driving at. I only want you to say whether
you know it by your ear, or by your eye ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I may savemy learned friend some trouble. The placard
which was pulled down by Little, I have here,
and I mean to produce it.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Very wel; "sufficient for
My learned friend, the Attorney,
the day"General, no doubt will do what is right. Then,
I don't ask you any more.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON :-Mr.
Rhodes, how long have you been connected with
the cotton trade ? Three or four years. During
that time, have the wages of the men fallen, or
been stationary ? They have fallen. Has that
fall been gradual, or from time to. time? It has,
sir, And at this time in August, was it not
generally expected among the workmen and
masters, that there would be a further reduction
in the wages, from the depressed state of trade ?
There was an impression that it would lead to
that. A general impression ? There was none
I am
contemplated in our neighbourhood.
speaking of the general impression
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The answer was, "There was none contemplated in our
neighbourhood." I think that a sufficient answer.
Mr. ATHERTON:-Do you know or not,
whether there was a general impression in the
neighbourhood, that a further reduction of wages
would take place ? I cannot answer that, sir. I
believe it was the feeling of the working people.
Had any others contemplated that reduction? As
far as I know, there was no general reduction of
wages contemplated. No general reduction. Was
there any reduction contemplated ? Not on the
general prices paid in the neighbourhood. Will
you answer the question ?-To your knowledge,
was there any reduction in that neighbourhood ?
Will you allow me to explain as far as I go ? I
was willing myself to give a farthing a cut more
than any one in the neighbourhood, and, I myself, contemplated reducing them down to the
prices paid in the neighbourhood. Then the
only contemplated reduction you know of 'was

9.5
he one you name ? Yes. Do you know whether
at this time, and in this part of the country,
there was not, from some cause or other, considerable discontent in the miuds of the working
men on the subject of wages ? I don't know
that there was any discontent among those
hands employed by me, or my father-in-law
either. But did you know that there was any

Fairhurst, Robert Wilde, Samuel Lees, and a man
whom they called Gibson, speak. Did you hear
a Mr. Cheetham, a county magistrate, speak
there? No; I never saw him at any of those
meetings. Now, you have stated to Counsel,
that you never heard any complaint as to the
wages the working people were then receiving-were there any complaints made at any of those

dissatisfaction among the working men gene-

meetings? It was not made a wage question at
any of those meetings ; it was distinctly stated
by Robert Wilde, one of the speakers, that he
was receiving 5s. a week more than he was receiving in 1840. Now, about what period did
your hands go back again to be taken to work ?
I have not yet finished my answer to your question. Fairhurst stated that the block printers
were receiving the same wages as they had been
receiving for eleven years. The meeting on the
11th and 12th, unanimously resolved, that it
should not be made a wage question-that it
was the Charter they wanted. This was put to

rally? They are always anxious to get as much
as they can. That is not an answer. WVas there,
or was there not, any dissatisfaction among the
workmen, generally, on the subject of wages ?
I am not aware that there was. Now, then,
about this placard-You heard this read at a
meeting in Mottram Moor? I did. Have you
from that time to this day seen the placard, the
copy of which you believe you have heard read ?
one.
Yes, but not the identical
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-I think
you statcd that the number of persons who attacked your mill ot the 10th of August was
about 200, as nearly as you could recollect; and
that when they came up, you stated that there
was no necessity for violence, because the hands
would be turned out ? Because we were willing
to stop the mill without it. On the 26th of
August, after your hands returned, another mob
visited you-how many were there in it? Several hundreds. Say to the full extent of your
belief-Say thousands.-What is the breadth of
the road ? About ten yards. And they filled it
for ten yards up ? Yes. How many might there
be on the second attack, when the larger number
came? They were not a thousand; they were
under that number: probably 500 or 600. On
the 26th you twice resisted successfully? We
did. You did.-You attended a meeting on the
19th? I did not say the 19th. I said the 18th
or 19th. Well, it was one day between the
17th and the 20th ? Yes. You attended a meeting on Mottram Moor on that day ? Yes. Were
any speakers there besides those to whom you
referred? I heard no speeches made at that
meeting between the 17th and 20th. There
were meetings held on the 11th, 12th, and 17th,
at which I heard speeches. Did you at any of
those meetings, hear speeches made other than
those you have read to the Court to-day ?
Yes, there was a
The JUDGE : -What meetings? Meotings
which were held on the 11th, 12th, and 17th of
August. I heard a person named James Wilde
speak at those meetings. I also heard John

the vote more than once. Now, what time did
your hands first begin to return to you to ask
liberty to work? We held daily converse with
some of the hands. About what time was the
general application made, and which you as,
snted to ? They always gave us an idea that
they were willing to work any time, when they
could do it without danger. When did you
consent to the general return of your men ? We
opened our doors on the 26th, and the hands
returned.
Mr. HIBBERT, Clerk of the Peace to the
Magistrates at Hyde, recalled.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : - Have you
got a placard that was given you by the constable Little? Yes. Produce it. [Witness produces
the placard.] Did you put your name on it anywhere ? No, sir. Can you recognise it by any
mark ? It has never been out of my possession;
and the words " Chartist Proclamation" on the
back, which words I wrote recently. When did
Little give it you ? About the middle of August
can't fix the day, but it was about the
-I
middle of August.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON :-Mr.
Hibbert, you say there is some writing of yours
on the back of this placard ? Yes. When was
that written ? Yesterday. I may observe that I
can recognise it perfectly without that. When
did Little deliver it to you ? About'the middle
of last August. You say it has not been out of
your possession? No. How, and where did you
keep it ? In my private drawer. Was it out

(i

96
your possession, or sight from the time he deli- protection, wages cannot be upheld nor in the

slightest degree regulated, until every workman
vered it to you till you put it in your drawer?
No, sir. Has it been in your drawer ever since ? on the same political level as the employer. He
knows that the Charter would remove by universal
Yes.
will, expressed in universal suffrage, the heavy
Mr. LITTLE re-called.
load of taxes which now crush the existence of
:-You stated the labourer, and cripple the efforts of commerce;
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
that it would give cheap government as well as
in your cross-examination, that you pulled down cheap food, high wages as well as low taxes, bring
a wall and delivered it to some happiness to the hearthstone, plenty to the table,
a placard from
one ? I ordered my assistant constable to pull it protection to the old, education to the young,
permanent prosperity to the country, long-contidown, and he did so in my presence, and I de- nued protective political power to labour, and
clerk. peace, blessed peace, to exhausted humanity and
livered it to Mr. Hibbert, the magistrates'
approving nations; therefore it is that we have
The JUDGE :-Where did you pull it down solemnly sworn, and one and all declared, that the
opposite the magistrates'office golden opportunity now within our grasp shall not
from? From the wall
in Hyde. When ? Between the 15th and 19th. pass away fruitless, that the chance of centuries
afforded to us by a wise and all-seeing God, shall
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - This, my not be lost; but that we now do universally reLord, is what Rhodes says he believes was read solve never to resume labour until labour's grievances are destroyed, and protection secured
at the meeting on the 19th, and perhaps I may ourselves, our suffering wives, and helpless, for
chilnow hand this up to your lordship. It is ex- dren, by the enactment of the People's Charter.
" Englishmen ! the blood of your brothers redactly a copy of the same. [Hands his lordship
dens the streets of Preston and Blackburn, and
a copy of the " Executive Placard."]
the murderers thirst for more, Be firm, be couMr. ATHERTON :-rI want to know if you rageous, be men. Peace, law, and order have
prevailed on our side-let them be revered until
can fix the day upon which this was pulled your brethren in Scotland,
Wales, and Ireland
down ?
are informed of your resolution; and when the
universal holiday prevails, which will be the case
WITNESS :-Between the 15th and 19th.
in eight days, then of what use will bayonets be
The CLERK of the CROWN then read the against public opinion? What tyrant can then
placard, a portion of which has already appeared live above the terrible tide of thought and energy,
which is now flowing fast, under the guidance of
in the opening speech of the Attorney-General. man's intellect, which is now destined by a
The following is a copy:Creator to elevate his people above the reach of
ADDRESS OF THE EXECUTIVE COM- want, the rancour of despotism, and the penalties
The trades, a noble, patriotic band,
MITTEE OF THE NATIONAL CHAR- of bondage. the lead in declaring for the Charter
have taken
TISTS' ASSOCIATION.
and drawing their gold from the keeping of ty" TO THE PEOPLE."

"Brother Chartists-The great political truths
which have been agitated during the last half-century have at length aroused the degraded and insulted white slaves of England to a sense of their
duty to themsplves, their children, and their
country. Tens of thousands have flung down their
implements of labour. Your taskmasters tremble
at your energy, and expecting masses eagerly
watch this the great crisis of our cause. Labour
must no longer be the common prey of masters
and rulers. Intelligence has beamed upon the
mind of the bondsman, and he has been convinced
that all wealth, comfort, and produce, everything
valuable, useful, and elegant, have sprung from
the palms of his hands; he feels that his cottage is
empty, his back thinly clad, his children breadless, himself hopeless, his mind harassed, and his
body punished, that undue riches, luxury, and
gorgeous plenty might be heaped on the palaces of
the taskmasters, and flooded in the granaries of
the oppressor. Nature, God, and reason, have
condemned this inequality, and in the thunder of
a people's voice it must perish for ever. He knows
that labour, the real property of society, the sole
origin of accumulated property, the first cause of
all national wealth, and the only supporter, defender, and contributor to the greatness of our
country, is not possessed of the same legal protectiou which is given to those lifeless effects, the
houses, ships, and machinery, which labour have
alone created. He knows that if labour has no

rants. Follow their example. Lend no whip to
rulers wherewith to scourge you.
" Intelligence has reached us of the widespreading of the strike, and now, within fifty
miles of Manchester, every engine is at rest, and
all is still, save the miller's useful wheels and the
friendly sickle. in the fields.
"Countrymen and brothers, centuries may roll
on as they have fleeted past, before such universal
action may again be displayed: we have made the
cast for liberty, and we must stand, like men, the
hazard of the die. Let none despond. Let all
be cool and watchful; and, like the bridemaids in
the parable, keep your lamps burning; and let
continued resolution be like a beacon to guide
those who are now hastening far and wide to
follow your memorable example.
" Brethren, we rely upon your firmness; cowardice, treachery, or womanly fear would cast
our cause back for half a century. Let no man,
woman, or child break down the solemn pledge,
and if they do, may the curse of the poor and
starving pursue them-they deserve slavery who
would madly court it.
" Our machinery is all arranged, and your
cause will, in three days, be impelled onward by
all the intellect we can summon to its aid; therefore, whilst you are peaceful, be firm; whilst you
are orderly, make all be so likewise; and whilst
you look to the law, remember that you had no
voice in making it, and are therefore the slavcs to
the will, the law, and the price of your miastcrs.

97
" All officers of the association are called upon house, and Morrison was along with 4t. Have
to aid and assist in the peaceful extension of the you any notion of what humber of persons that
movement, and to forward all monies for the use
Did you count
of the delegates who may be expressed over the procession consisted ? Yes.
country. Strengthen our hands at this crisis. them? No; there were several hundreds in it.
Support your leaders. Rally round our sacred Had they anything in their hands ? They had
cause, and leave the decision 'to the God of walking sticks, but they were no great size.
k
were the
justice and of battle.'
" Charles Turner, printer, Turner-street, near Were they walking in any particular order ?
St. Paul's Church, Manchester."
They were four or five abreast. Were they linked
GEORGE NASMYTH, examined by Sir arm-in-arm? I can't say. In what direction
GREGORY LEWIN:-Are you the occupier were they going ? Towards Patricroft. Were
of works at Patricroft, in the pariah of Eccles ? there mills there ? No. Did you follow them ?
Yes. What description of works are they ? No, I remained at home. Is that all you saw of
They are called the Bridgewater Foundary. You them? Yes, that day. Well, the next day. or
employ 200 or 300 men ? Yes. Up to the 10th
o the day after that, did you see them again ? No,
t
of August, were your workmen in constant and
regular employment ? Yes. When did they turn- that was the last day. Did you hear any more
out ? The morning of the 11th. You got up early speeches ? No, sir, before that I was called upon
that morning I believe ? Yes. Was your attention to be sworn in as special constable. Were you
arrested by anything ? Yes, by those passing my at a meeting on the 12th of August ? Yes. Was
house. They passed in parties of ten or twelve Morrison present then ? No.
Did you hear
at a time.
any speeches then ? Yes. From whom ? From
The JUDGE :-Where is Eccles ?
some of the men. What was their general na.
Mr. MURPHY:-About four miles from ture and character? They recommended great
Manchester, towards Liverpool.
peace and order, and to continue out till the
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--You got up early Charter became thelaw of the land; but I really
vou say? Yes.

In what direction were the mob

going? Towards Eccles.

Did you go therem? could not distinctly hear it,

Yes. When you got there, did you see these
persons do anything ? I did not at that time;
but I saw an assemblage of persons there, and a
cart. Was there any one speaking ? Not at that
time. After that ? A few minutes after. Did
you know any of the speakers ? Yes. Who did
you know ? I knew the man that took the chair.
Who is he? David Morrison. Did he address
the multitude? Yes. He, as the chairman, said
a few words, and introduced a person of the name
of Bell. Did he address the audience? Yes.
Well, will you just tell me the general nature
and character of Bell's address ? I scarcely recollect it. Did you follow them to any other
place? No. What happened after Bell addressed
the meeting? Morrison proposed that a deputation should go to the different mills, and have the
hands turned out, but the proposal was not at all
agreed to. Was any other plan substituted?
Some person proposed that the whole assembly
should go; who that person was I don't know.
How was the second proposition received ? They
immediately went towards Bindloss' and Preston's mills. Did you go with them? No. Then
what happened at Bindloss' and Preston's mills,
you of your own knowledge don't know ? No.
Did Morrison go with them? I am not aware.
You did not see him separate from them ? No.
Did you afterwards see him ? Not that day. On
any other day? I saw him again within a day.
Was he alone ? No. Well, just tell us who were
with him ? There was a procession passing my

Was there any
banner ? Yes. What sort of a banner? A small
white cloth was used for a banner, with the
words "Peace, law, and order" inscribed on it.
What was on the other side ? As far as my
memory serves me, it was political equality. Do
you know Tetlow's house ? Yes. Did you see a
mob there ? Yes.
What is he ? A retired
gentleman of fortune. Where is Tetlow's ? On
the side of the canal, near Patricroft. Is that
all you have seen of Morrison? Yes, to the best

of my knowledge.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Did
Morrison work under you ? Yes. What character did he bear ? He bore an excellent character, as far as regarded his conduct in the
works.
NATHAN FRYAR, examined by Mr. HILDYARD:-What are you? I am foreman of the
blacksmiths at the Bridgewater-works inWorsley.
Do you remember a body of men coming to the
works on the 11th of August ? Yes, Did their
works on the 11th of August? Yes, Did their
numbers increase ? Yes. Were your men at their
breakfast at that time? The men went to breakfast while they were there. I remember when
the bell was rung for reassembling the men after
breakfast.Was the defendant Morrison there? Yes.
Was he one of the party who assembled at your
works ? Yes. Did he speak to any one ? Yes, he
spoke to our Inspector. Mr. Smith and Mr.
Pearson are the managers, or superiors, of your

98
works ? Yes.

Did they hold any communication of delegates?

with the mob ? Yes, Mr. Pearson did, and afterwards ordered the mob off the premises, and said
he would send the men round to them. Didyou,
in consequence, direct your men to go, and hear
what the mob had to say to them? Yes. Did
you attend and hear what passed? Yes. Did
Morrison address your men? Yes. Tell us shortly
what he said? He was not the first speaker on
that occasion. But I ask you respecting Morrison; what did he say ? He spoke of the distress
that existed; and said, that although we might
think we were well off, yet ultimately the distress
would reach us also ; that it was our duty to sympathize with them, and that if we did not turn
out quietly, they would bring such a force as
would compel us. Did a man of the name of
Eccles also address the mob ?
Mr. MURPHY :-Is he one of the defendants ?
Mr. HILDYARD :-No. Now, tell us what
Eccles said ? Well, at this length of time, I almost forget what he said. Was anything said
about a clock ? Yes; he used this expression:"We are come like a clock to give warning before
we strike, and you may now consider that you
.'
Did you, in consequence of inhave warning.
structions you had received from Mr. Pearson, go
and tell the mob that the men would cease working ? Yes. On the same afternoon of the 11th,
were you at Eccles ? Yes. You remember seeing
a mob there ? Yes.
The JUDGE:-This was all at Eccles ? No,
my Lord, at Worsley. I thought you said at the
Bridgewater Foundry ? It is called the Bridgewater Foundry, because it is on the banks of the
Duke of Bridgewater's canal. Ours is the Bridgewater Forge.
Mr. HILDYARD :-Did you then see a mob
of persons? Yes. Did it strike you that they
were the same mob you had seen in the morning ?
Yes.
Mr. MURPHY :-Where was that?
WITNESS:-At Eccles.
Mr. HILDYARD :-Was there a cart brought
to the mob, to serve as a platform for them ? Yes.
Was the meeting addressed by several persons ?
Yes. Did a person of the name of M'Cartney
Yes. Who was the
address the meeting?
chairman, do you know, on that occasion ?
I don't know. Did the chairman introduce
M'Cartney to the mob? Yes. Did M'Cartney
address the mob? He did; I believe he addressed them at considerable length. Tell us
shortly, will you, the substance of his remarksas shortly as you can ? His first words were
"Fellow-slaves, this is the beginning of the end.
This is a struggle between rampant capital and
prostrate labour,"

He informed them that at a
meeting of delegates in Manchester, it was resolved, that they would not identify themselves
with any class in a turn-out merely for the advance of wages. Was the people's Charter
mentioned by him ? Yes. What did he say
about it? He said the struggle was strictly
political, and that all work should cease till the
document known as the People's Charter had
become the law of the land.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Who said this?
Mr. HILDYARD :-M'Cartney. Did he mention the names of the different places that were

united with him in endeavouring to effect that
Yes; he mentioned Staffordshire,
object ?
Yorkshire, Ashton, Stalybridge, and many other
places.
Was Birmingham uentioned ? Yes;
" above all," said he, "you have the support of
the men of Birmingham, who carried the Reform Bill." Now, on Saturday morning, the 13th
of August, were you at Eccles ? Yes. About
seven or eight o'clock in the morning, was there
a mob assembled there ? Yes. Was the mob
Was Morriso
addressed from a cart ? Yes.
prdsent at that meeting ? Yes. Was there an
address, purporting to be an address from Mr.
Locke, one of the Bridgewater Trustees, read ?
Yes. After that was received, what took place?
It was proposed that it should be burned. Did
Morrison again address the mob on that oscasion ? Yes. Did he address them to the same
purport as he had done previously ? Quite in
When the
the language of encouragement.
speakers had ceased to addressed the mob, did
the mob march on? Yes. Had they a flag
with them ? Yes. Did the flag go in advance
of the meeting. Yes. And how did the mob
move ?-Irregularly, or in order?-They formed
a procession of four or five deep.
Mr. MURPHY:-I don't ask you anything.
Cross-examined by BERNARD M'CARTNEY,
a defendant :-I am desirous, my Lordof asking
him a question. What dates have you spoken
to with regard to the meeting, at which you say
M'Cartney was present ? The 11th of August.
Did you notice the counsel who examined you,
requesting you to state briefly, the whole substance of what you heard M'Cartney say at that
meeting ? Yes. You have done so ? Yes. You
have ! You don't remember, then, M'Cartney
saying anything more than what you have related? O, I may have heard many things more,
but a brief statement was what I was asked for.
Did he speak of a meeting Did you hear M'Cartney urge that meeting to

99
any particular line of conduct ? You urged them ing take place ? Thursday, the 11th of August.
to continue in their present- course, and that Did you hear, or do you know of your own
ultimately they would be successful. Did you knowledge, anything of gentlemen and men of
hear any injunctions given by M'Cartney to the property in that immediate neighbourhood supmeeting, with regard to the general character of plying with food, money, and other assistance,
those who were on strike, or engaged in the turntheir conduct, in the adoption or following out out I kn
myself. You
out
of that course, which you say he recommended "lf ? Iknownoting of the sort, Saturday,
you attended another meeting on
'anysaigsay
I left M'Cartney speaking.
the 13th ? Was I present? No, I did not see you
The JUDGE:-That is the party, is it? I am at that meeting at all. Were there any indications
quite positive that is the man [alluding to of violence, that came within your own knowledge,
M'Cartney.]
either at Worsley or Patricroft ? -Violence to
M'CARTNEY :-Did you hear anything said person or property ? No. I think you have sworn
of the sacredness of property ? No. Did you in evidence, if my memory serves me, that I rehear me recommend to that meeting to abstain commended a strictly peaceable course of action ?
from every act which would have a tendency to No, I did not hear you.
The JUDGE:-He did not hear you out, and
destroy even one single blade of g'ass ? I was
not there at the time. What might be thetherefore you might have said it, though he did
not hear it.
numbers which you estimated that meeting at?
M'CART
Nearly 200, I think. Did you conceive that to counsel, that I recommended peace.
to counsel, that I recommended peace.
meeting to be generally of a peaceful character,
The JUDGE :-What I have taken down isor a mere mob? After our men had been, r amere After men been
M'Cartneyour had Fellow-slaves, this is the bemb? said, "
stopped from work by the same men I saw I ginning of the end.
artoppeundwork by the same men I saw - _fm
This is a struggle between
around me, I could not considerll peacefulry, capital and prostrate labour." He inme and
them
rampant
Now, sir, you just tell and the jury, formed them that at a meeting of delegates held
will
me
what indication of anything that was not peace- in Manchester, it was resolved, that they would
ful you saw at that meeting ?
not identify themselves with any class that
The JUDGE --Turning out the men from turned out merely for the advance of wages.
thei wor.i
He
their work.
said the struggle is strictly political, and that all
M'CARTNEY :-My Lord, I am not speak- work should cease till the document known as
ing of the conduct of the party or parties who the People's Charter, became the law of the
were at his works, but I am desirous of having land. He mentioned several laces that were
his evidence of the general character of the united in the movement, and " Above all," said
meeting which I addressed. What indication of he, " you have the support of the men of
other than peaceableness was there given at that Birmingham, who carried Reform; "-that is
Birmingha m, who carried Reform; "-that is
meeting which I addressed?
M'CARTNEY :-You heard me urge nothing
The JUDGE :-You saw no actual violence at
that meeting?
of the necessity of those who attended that
WITNESS:-No actual violence except the meeting, respecting even the opinions of those
presence of people who stopped the mill. Did who differed with them in politics? No. You
you see in, or at that meeting, any of the gentlemen of the neighbourhood whom you knew to be had gone then, )ou say ?-You did not hear me
magistrates? No, not one. Did you see a gen- urge them to keep the peace ? No. Did you
tleman on horseback outside the meeting? I did. hear me urge them to a contrary tenour of conDid you know that gentleman to be a magistrate? duct ? No. Was not the meeting marked by the
No. Do you know that he is not? Yes, if he be absence of violence? Threatening language was
the gentleman that I allude to. Did you see a used by persons at that meeting towards those
gentleman in a gig? No. You think there were' who were occupied at our works.
none of the magistrates of that vicinity present at
GEORGE ROWE, examined by Mr. POLthe meeting while I was addressing them? No. LOCK:-Were you in the month of August last, a
a
the month of August last,
Might there have been? There might have been LOCK--Were you in
of Mr. Greenwood, an
a dozen, for aught I know. Have you reason to coachman in the employ
believe, or dishelieve, that I was present with, or innkeeper at Eccles? Yes. Are you acquainted
at all mixed up in the party who went to your with the person of M'Cartney? I never saw him
works, or in the vicinity of your works ? No, before that night. Where did you see him first ? I
you were not there. Then why not say that? saw him on the 11th of August,in the Bull's Head,
Because you did not ask it. When did the meet- in Eccles. l)id you see him addressing a meeting

100
of people in Eccles ?i No. Do you remember day's labour. Ts that all ? And they must not
his engaging a carriage from your master, to resume their labour till they get the wages of
take him somewhere? Yes. Where to ? To 1840. Anything said about. the mills? I am
Leigh. What time of day was that ? We started not aware, sir. Very well; you know a man of
from Eccles about ten minutes past six, in the the name of Woolfenden ? I have seen him, sir.
evening. Did you hear him say at what time Was he there? I cannot speak to him. You
lie must be at Leigh ? He said he was to be know the man who goes by the name of General
there a little before eight o'clock. HIow far is Lee ? Yes, I saw him there that morning.
it from Eccles to Leigh ? Between eight and What is his real name ? That I am not aware of,
nine miles. Did you drive him to Leigh ? Yes, only he goes by the name of General Lee.
sir. Did you see anything more of him that What did you see him doing? [My Lord, we
evening ? In half an hour after, sir, I was coming shall prove by other witnesses that that is Rohome again, and, on my left-hand side, coming bert Lees, one of the defendants.] What did
out of Leigh, I saw him again.-He was merely you see Lee doing? O, I did not see him doing
pulling his hat off, and bowing. Was there any anything. Did the mob move towards Manbody else there ? There were people mustering chester ? They did. What did General Lee do?
about; that was all I saw. Where was he He went along with them. Where did he gostanding ? He was standing on a lump of dirt, in the front or back of them? That I am not
addressing the meeting.
aware of. I went to get my breakfast, and afSAMUEL TURNER, examined by Mr. WORT- terwards went in with them to Manchester.
LEY :-What are you? A farmer. Do you live Did you pass through Holt Town ? I did. At
at Ashton-under-Lyne ? Yes. Do you remember Holt Town did you see the mob do anything ?
being at a meeting on Thacker's ground in Ash- Yes; I saw them stop two or three factories.
ton? Yes. What day ?-On Sunday ? No, on What do you mean by stopping two or three
Tuesday, the 9th of August. What time of the factories ? They came to the doors, and when
day was the meeting held ? It was arranged for they would not admit them in, they used some
six o'clock in the morning. Were you there at kind of violence to press them out. Did you
six ? I was there a few minutes after. How see anything done to any of the doors in Holt
many people were there ? 800 or 900, or 1000. Town ? I saw one where the "stoops" [doors]
When you first went ? Yes. Did they increase were shifted loose by forcing them. Did you
afterwards? Yes. Was there any cart for the see any person leaving them as they went to
speakers to stand on ? Yes, a cart or a waggon, Manchester ? No. Did you see anybody in the
I cannot speak to which. Who was in the front of them ? No. Did you recognise any of
chair ? At the time I went there was no one in those whom you did see ? I did not know any
the chair. Did you see any one moved into the party, for they came from all parts of the counchair? Yes, Mr. Southam.
try. When did you last see General Lee ? Not
The JUDGE :-Is he a defendant ?
after leaving Ashton. Did you continue with
Mr. WORTLEY :-No, my Lord,-Do you them ?-Did you see any person meet the mob
know Pilling? Yes. Did he speak ? Yes. Did as they were going to Manchester ? No.-0 yes,
he say anything about Manchester? Yes. What a Manchester magistrate met them. Was that
did he say? He wished to go along with the Mr. Maude, the magistrate? Yes, sir. Who had
body to Manchester, to meet the masters at the he with him? Well, there was another gentleExchange, as the masters would not meet them. man, who, I understand, is a magistrate. I
What else did he say ?-Did he say what they believe they call him Mr. Brown.-There were
were to do as they went ?
I some soldiers in Stevenson's-square.
When
Mr. DUNDAS:-Ask what he said.-Don't did you first meet Mr. Maude? I met him down
put it into his mouth,
at the factories in Holt Town.-That place is
Mr. WORTLEY:-I don't want him to make above Ancoats.lane, and is on the Ashton road.
a long speech.
When you came down to the factories, you saw
Mr. DUNDAS :-He is not a clever man Mr. Maude, and after that you saw the military
when you get nothing out of him.
in Stevenson's-square ? Yes. Did you see Mr.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Do you remember any- Maude speaking to the mob ? Yes. Were you
thing else? He wanted them to go and meet the at a meeting that same day at Granby-row-

1

J

masters, and have a fair day's wages for a fair fields ? Yes.

Did you see people coming away

101

from that ? Yes; they were coming away in. a
procession. Did you see anybody in front of it ?
Why, there were hundreds of thousands, but I
did not know any one in particular. Am I to
understand that the last time you saw Lee, was
in the morning, at Ashton ? Yes. You never
saw him in Manchester that day at all ? No.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-Have you
ever said so, my friend? No, never. They are
mistaken who think you did ? I never saw Lee
after leaving Ashton on that morning. Was
this company of people that you had been attending, the same people that had been in Ashton ? Part of them. Did you understand that
they were going to Manchester about their
wages ? The expression was that they would
go to meet the masters at Manchester, as the
masters would not meet them. And why did
you go with them ? On purpose to s'ee what
would be the termination of it. Was it to
gratify yourself, or had you any other object in
view? There was a lad of mine going, and I
followed him, lest he should get into some
scrape. I will tell the truth now. Did the
people who went in such a body to Manchester,
follow Maude to town ?-Did he go at the head
of them to town? No. What then became of
Maude ? He was there at twelve o'clock when
the people were stopping the factories, and he
told them to be peaceable and comfortable. He
said, " There is a meeting in Granby-row-fields,
and if you wish to go and meet them there, you
will find everything right, and straight, and
comfortable."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-First he told
them not to stop the factories ?-They were
stopping a mill? Yes; he told them not to
stop the factories, that a meeting was going on
in Granby-row-fields, and that if they would
go there they would find everything right, and
straight, and comfortable.--(Laughter.)
Mr. DUNDAS :-Did they go in the direction
of Granby-row-fields ? I am not aware of it.
Did you recognize any one among the persons
who met in the early part of the day, as they
were coming from Granby-row-fields ? No; a
part of them stuck together, and we went down
to the Exchange to see what would be said of
it. O then they did not take the advice of the
did not go to Granby-rowmagistrate ? No; I r
fields, I know. Where did you go ? We went
to take a glass of ale, and a bit of "summet"

them every praise that possibly could be given
them for being so quiet. Was the mob in good
humour with the magistrates? Well, I should
think so; I never saw any quarrelling; I saw
" neawt to fait about." How far did you go
with the mob afterwards ?-Did you go to the
Exchange ? I had been there before that, and
on going down to Granby-row-fields, I met a
party leaving it. Did you see any of the masters at the Exchange ? I did not know anybody.
Was there any parley between the masters and
these men ? O there was nothing at all stirring.
Was there a mob there? No mob at all. And
what became of all those men you came to
Manchester with? O they all went to Granbyrow-fields. Why did you go then to see if there
was aught to do, or not ? Why did I go there
I wor na General Lee. When did you get home
to your house that night ? About half-past
four, or five o'clock. Did you find the people at
Granby-row-fields going back all comfortable,
peaceable, and straight a-head ?-Were they in
good humour? I saw nobody fight. No; that
is the least degree of good humour. Were they
going home to their own place? Yes; like
myself. You were going home in good humour ?
I was going home to my wife and family.
ARCHIBALD M'MULLEN, examined by Sir
GREGORY LEWIN :-Are you an Inspector of
the Manchester Police force ? I am, sir. Now,
on the 9th of August, did a large assembly of
persons enter Manchester? There did.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Were you in Court while
the last witness was being examined ? I was
not. Were you in Court yesterday? No.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-That assemblage
came from the neighbourhood of Ashton-from
the direction of Ashton? About what time of the
day waso'clock. they arrived? Between ten and
eleven it that Were the numbers very great?
They were, sir. 'Have you any notion of what
the numbers might be ? I cannot form any exact
notion. Were they hundreds, or thousands
Thousands I should say. What took place
Coming down Ancoats-street, they divided.
you seen Mr. Maude previously ? I had. Where
did he meet them? When I saw them they were
at the corner, of Pollard-street, and Ancoatsstreet. Now at the time Mr. Maude met them,
were they advancing in regular order? They
were, sir. They had not broken or dispersed at
that time ? No. Just describe how they were
marching? They were four abreast in a procession. Were they marching arm-in-arm or not ?

to eat. What did the magistrates do ? They No. Were there any women amongst them ?
escorted the body through the town, and gave Yes. Where were they ? In different parts.

102
The JUDGE :-Birley's mill or house? His
Any banners ? No. Flags ? No. Any arms of
any description ? Some had small sticks in their mills, my lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Tell me the manhands. Now, you say Mr. Maude met them at
the corner of Ancoats-street, and Great Pollard- ner in which the attack you saw, was made ?
street ?-Was any one with them then ? Some !They were throwing stones at the windows. Did
of the military men were there with Colonel they use anything else besides stones ? There
Wemyss. Did you see Mr. Maude advance up were some coals which they used as well. Did
to them, and address them ? Yes, but I could you see a hammer there ? I did not, sir. Were
not hear what was going on. At the time he there any slates broke ? I did not see any slates,
was speaking to them, had the procession halted ? sir ; the gates were broke. How were they broke?
They had. How long did this last? For a short I did not see them breaking them; they were
time. What followed upon that ? On going broke when I reached the place. Did you obdown a short distance from there, some of them serve the particular state of the gates ? Yes, sir.
began a breaking off from the procession, and Describe the state they were in ? The boards
stopping a mill. After he ceased to speak to were broken quite through, as if with some very
them, did they advance after him? They turned strong instrument. Did you see any thing reout of Pollard-street, and down great Ancoats- markable inside ?-Did you see any bags of cotstreet, in the same processional order. I left ton? I saw some inside the yard. How many
Great Ancoats-street, and went to Mr. Murray's panes of glass were there broken ? I should think
mill, and met a mob of fifty persons or more about 3000 or 4000. With regard to the winthere. Now, what took place there ? They de- dow frames ? A great number of them were
manded the hands to be turned out of the mill. broken out, sir. How came they to leave Birley's ?
Did you interpose at all? Not at that time. I A strong body of the police came up, and immestood by. Were the hands turned out, in con- diately took some of the mob into custody; and
sequence of that demand ? One of the managers
came to the door, and told them to stop, and the
hands would be turned out. Were they turned
out? I don't know; I did not stop. I went
from there to the Town-hall, and the next meeting I saw, was a meeting in Granby-row-fields.
Now, to the best of your judgment, how many
were there in Granby-row-fields ?-Did anything
take place here ? Not at that time. I was not
there more than five minutes. The next thing I
heard, was that the mob were breaking the Oxford Twist Company's mill. This was about four
o'clock. They were breaking the windows, and
turning the hands out. I went down there. The
military had got there before me, and had taken
twelve prisoners into custody.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Did you see that ? No.
The JUDGE :-Did you see that? No, my
Lord; information was received at the Townhall, that this was done.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Did you go there
in consequence of information you had received ?
Yes, and I found the military there. The windows were broken. Were there stones flying
about or not? I did not perceive any. You say
the military had twelve prisoners in custody?
They had, sir. Were the window-frames'broken
as well as the windows ? They were, sir. Were
the hands turned out? They were, sir. Was the
mill stopped? Yes, sir. Did you see in what
direction the mob next proceeded? Coming out
from the mills, I saw them in the act of breaking
Birley's windows. Is he a mill-owner in Manchester ? He is.

others were apprehende d inside of the gates by
the overlookers of the mill. From Birley's where
did they go ? They proceeded to Becton's. Is
that another mill ? Yes. When they got to Becton's what did they do ?-Stirling and Becton's, is
it ? Yes. When you got there what did you see ?
The window frames were all smashed to pieces.
Were the mob doing anything as regards the
window frames when you got there ? I did not see
them doing anything. What were they doing ?
A body of the police had then got up, and the
mob went away. Were the mob resisted by the
people on the premises ? They were. Did the
town of Manchester continue in a bad state ?
Yes, for several days. Were the shops shut up ?
They were. Were the mills generally stopped
throughout the town? They were. Do you know
a person of the name of Leach? I do, sir. In
consequence of information that you received, did
you get a warrant and go in search of him ? I
did, sir. Did you find him? The chief-superintendant found him. What is Leach ?-When
did you find him ? On the 17th. What is his first
name? James. What is he? He keeps a small
bookshop. Where did you find him? In his own
house. When you got to his house, did you
notice anything particular ? Not at the first entrance. But after? Yes, a board. Was there
anything on the board ? Yes. What was it ? A
large placard. Did you notice a placard they
were reading at the time? No, sir, I did not.
Tell me, is that [handing witness a copy of the
" Executive Placard "] the placard you got on
the board? Yes, that is it.
Mr. DUNDAS :-What day was this?.

103
Sir OREGORY LEWIN:--It was on the
17th ; I told you two or three times.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I am much obliged for the
information.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then put in
a copy of the " Executive Placard."
The JUDGE :-Give me the first words in the
fourth paragraph at the bottom.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-"Let none
despond."
The JUDGE :-Mine is, " Let none despair."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-1 do not
know, my lord, whether it happens from accident;
but, I believe, the fact was, that the types were
seized, and some few copies were struck off
afterwards for the convenience of your lordship.
The JUDGE ?-I see "despair" is not exactly
in the same letter.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-When the
types were found, some of the letters fell out, and
three were put in.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Was the placard
n the shop ? Yes. Where was it in the shop ?
On a board against the wall. I think it was at
night you apprehended Leach? Yes, about
eleven o'clock. Was there any reason for believing that he was in the shop, before you went
there ? I cannot say, sir.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-How
long have you resided in Manchester? About
seventeen years. Are you aware, that there has
been a procession every 16th of August, during
that entire time ? I believe there was. Are you
aware that it was in contemplation to have a procopsion on the last 16th of August? Ybs. Are
you aware, that there were notices issued by the
committee, appointed for the management of
that procession to the effect, that, in consequence
of the recommendation of the magistrates, and
the disturbed state of the district, there would
be no procession held ? I believe it was so. Are
you aware, that it was afterwards intended, that
a public meeting should be held on a private
piece of ground, belonging to Mr. Scholefield?
I am not aware of that. Did you see placards in
the first instance, to that effect? I believe I
did. You believe you did-and why did not you
answer ?
The JUDGE :-What placards do you allude
to ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Placards, my Lord, announcing, that a public meeting, which was to
be held on a private piece of ground, belonging
H

to Mr. Scholefield, was put offin consequence of
the state of the district. [To witness] Are you
aware that Mr. Scholefield communicated to the
magistrates, that he would not have that meeting
there, in consequence of the -tate of the town?
No. Are you aware, that the meeting did not take
place there on the 16th ? Not to my knowledge.
On the virtue of your oath, I ask you, did you
ever see so tranquil a 16th of August, as the
last? O, no! What was there indicating disturbance ? I never saw the town so full of people
before. Did any breach of the peace take place
on that day? I am not aware that there was any
breach of the peace on that day. Are you not
aware that many weeks' notice was given, that
there was a procession on the 16th of August,
by what was called the Hunt's Monument Committee, and that those notices were circulatqd
throughout the country ? I cannot say they
were circulated throughout the country, but
the report in town was such. I don't know
what was in the country. There were notices
for several weeks my lord, that there would be a
procession. [To the witness.] Now,. the notice
that there would not be a procession was short
-the procession was put off by only a few days
notice? Yes, I believe that was so. And then
the unusual gathering in Manchester on that day
might have been caused by the persons who got
notice in the country of the procession about
to be held, but who had not got notice that it
was put off ? I cannot say. Now, when did you
get notice of the marching of these people to
Manchester? On the 9th-Tuesday. At what
would you estimate the number of persons that
usually attended those demonstrations on the
16th ? They were very small lately-for the last
two or three years. Have you ever seen 50,000,
40,000, or 30,000, in one of those processions
on the 16th? No. Have you ever seen them
estimated in the newspapers at 300,000 ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My lord, I
object to this question.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Well, how many days was
Manchester in a disturbed state? About four or
five days. When did Manchester begin to assume a perfectly tranquilappearance, altogether ?
About five or six weeks. Do you mean by tranquillity a return of the men to their work ? For
several weeks there were outbreaks occasionally
in different parts of the town. What time did
you apprehend Leach? At eleven o'clock on the
night of the 17th. Now, had you visited his
house before eleven o'clock, for the purpose of

104
arresting him ? No, but I had passed his house
several times in the course of the evening. Did
you watch him going in ?-Did you see him
go in ? No. Were you enquiring for him?
No. About what time were you past before ?You passed several times, and what did you pass
for? To take notice of what was going on.
When did you commence to parade before
Leach's house? About three o'clock. And did
you keep watching there from three o'clock till
you arrested him ? No. Did you enquire at any
period before you arrested him, whether he was
in or not ? I made several enquiries, but I could
get no information. How did you enquire afterwards, when did you get information ? When
I got to the house I enquired. But you did not
go before to enquire ? Not to his house. Now,
sir, had you any reason to know the hour at
which Leach returned to his own house ? I had
not. Did you at any time state that you had?
No, I did not. If your memory was refreshed,
would you know ?-Did you state before the
magistrates that you had reason to believe that
Leach did not return till ten o'clock ?-Did
you state to the magistrates that you had
reason to believe that Leach would be in
his house at ten o'clock ? No. Do you
recollect what you swore before the magistrates? No. Doyourecollect, sir, thatitwas you
that arrested me ? I do. Do you recollect when I
was in custody,that a gentleman came downto see
me-? I do, sir. Do you recollect him having
thirteen or fourteen letters addressed to me ? Yes.
Do you recollect my telling him to open those
letters in your presence ? Yes. And you won't
undertake to say what hour Leath returned, or

mation of the magistrates came out on the 14th.
-- How long after this was it before the mills in
Manchester resumed their work ? It would be
about a fortnight before they attempted to start
their mills again. Did any military come into
Manchester? Yes. How many? A large numThe
didber. Guards cme in? I believe it would be on
the 14th. It was on a Sunday morning, I believe.
Well, that would be the 14th.-Did any artillery
come in? Yes. Do you recollect what force of
artillery you saw ? They had two field-pieces.
Do you remember if any other bodies of military
came in? There was a great number.
RICHARD BESWICK sworn.
M'CARTNEY:-May I inquire from the witness, whether he has been in Court to-day during
the examination of any of the preceding witnesses ?
BESWICK:-I have not, Mr. M'Cartney.

Nor yesterday ? No.

Examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:

You are chief superintendant of police to the
borough of Manchester, I believe ? Yes, sir. You
were so in August last ? Yes. Where were you
on the 9th of August last? At the Liverpool Assizes. On the business of your office ? Yes.
What time did you get back to Manchester from
Liverpool? Late on Tuesday evening. In what
state did you find the town of Manchester when
you returned to it ? On Wednesday morning, I
found it in a most disturbed state. Was any of
the ordinary business of the town going on at all ?
On Wednesday morning, there were some few
places working, but during the day they were
stopped.
The JUDGE :-Were some mills at work? My
Lord, I don't know whether the mills were working or not, but some machines were turning at
that you expected to see him there at ten o'clock. various places in town, but uuring the day they
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--Describe the state of the town on the 9th
and 10th of August? On the 9th, a great number
of mills were stopped; and, on the 10th, the mob
were entering shops and taking bread. The magistrates were swearing in special constables, as
fast as they could get them. Was there any business done in Manchester during the whole of that
Tuesday and Wednesday ? None at all. This
was Tuesday the 9th, and the 16th would be the
anniversary of Hunt-the following Tuesday? It
would, sir. When did the proclamation of the
magistrates come out? I am not aware that they
put any proclamation out. When did the Queen's
proclamation come out ?- Do you remember
that ?

stopped.
The JUDGE :-Do you mean the machinery
of the
Lord,
-shops mills? No, mywhere but in machine shops
in the town
machines are made.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Some few
of these were at work on Wednesday morning,
but they stopped in th ourseof the day? Yes.
oe
Now can you, from your knowledge, state in what

manner any of them were stopped? Yes; large
numbers of persons went in bodies.
The JUDGE :-Did you see them? I did, my
Lord; and they ordered the engines to bestopped,
or they would destroy the windows. Were you
in different parts of Manchester during that day ?
I was. Was there any part of Manchester free
from this interruption ? At some parts of the day,
all parts of Manchester were interrupted. Can
The JUDGE :-It is not in evidence.
you form any notion of the number of persons
The AtTORNEY-GENERAL --It is, my who were moving about from place to place, in
Lord; it came out on the 15th, and the procla- Manchester, doing what you have described? I

105
cannot form any opinion as to their number, but
a very large number of persons were moving
about that I never saw in the town in my life.
You are now speaking of Wednesday the 10th ?
Yes. A very large number of strangers were then
in town. Are you acquainted with the fact of a
procession taking place annually in Manchester,
on Tuesday the 16th of August ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-Annually, not annually on
Tuesday.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-O yes, annually on the 16th of August.
WITNESS :-Yes, they have done so for many
years past. Of late years has that procession been
very much, or very little attended ? Lately, very
little indeed. How long have you been acquainted
with Manchester, so as to be able to speak to
these facts ? I have been in the Manchester police thirteen or fourteen years. Now, I beg to
ask you this distinct question, and pray answer it
with great care,-are you able to tell me whether
with reference to the procession on the 16th of
August, it was usual for people to collect together
so much as six or seven days before? Certainly
not. What I want to know is, whether the large
number of persons in Manchester on Tuesday or
Wednesday, could be referred to the procession
that was to take place on the 16th of August ? No.
Then I cannot understand the cross-examination
in the sense that was intended.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I did not cross-examine
him in that way at all, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-It is no matter now.
Mr. DUNDAS :-The Attorney-General need

not be angry about it; I told him that that was
not the object for which the witness was crossexamined,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My friend
can answer for himself only.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I answer for myself particularly, that I am angry-my friend never is.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL [to witness]:
-Now will you dzscribe the acts of the persons
you saw during the course of that Wednesday ?
WITNESS :-.I saw large numbers of persons
going about on Wednesday, the 10th, in the
neighbourhood of Deansgate.

The JUDGE :-Is that in the suburbs of Manchester ? Itis, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - Did any
military come in about that time? There did, sir.
Do you remember on what day ? On Thursday.
Did you go to that meeting in Granby-row-fields?

could not tell, but they went to various shops and
demanded bread. In many instances the request
was complied with and bread was thrown out to
them. Do yoi know any instances of their getting anything besides bread ? In Oldham-street,
also, a large number of persons were going about.
Did you see whether they got anything besides
bread ? No. What was the state of the town on
the Thursday ? A large meeting was held on
Thursday morning, in Granby-row-fields. Where
is that, in reference to Manchester ? It is within
the borough of Manchester, near Chorlton-uponMedlock; there were several thousands. Did
you end-eavour to disperse that meeting? The
mayor spoke to the chairman, Doyle, and the
meeting generally, and told them that the town
was in a most excited state, and that he could not
allow the meeting to continue longer, and hoped
they would disperse and go to their respective
homes. Did Doyle, or anybody else, make any
answer? I was on a restive horse, and did not
hear particularly, but I believe Doyle was wishful
for them to disperse. But, did the meeting disperse ? Not for sometime. The mayor and magistrates told them to disperse, and after keeping
the people for ten minutes they did disperse;did the town continue in that state for any length
of time ? It continued in that state for some
days.
The JUDGE :-In the same state? It con.
tinued in the same state till Friday, but it improved after that. On the 17th, did you see any
where about Manchester a placard ? Yes, I did.
Just take the one that was found at Leach's.Were you present when this was taken ? [Hands
him the Executive Placard]. No, I sent for it
afterwards. Was a placard similar to this posted
about the town of Manchester ? Yes. When
did you first see that placard? On the morning
of the 17th. That was the first day you saw it ?
Yes. That would be the day after which Hunt's
procession was to have taken place. Now, did
you go to the house of Turner, the printer? I
did, sir. His name is at the bottom of this
placard Yes. Did you apprehend him ? I
did, sir.
The JUDGE :-Is he one of the defendants ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-No, my Lord.
[To Witness.] Did you search the house ? I
did, sir. Did you find a placard with any directions upon it ? There was one found by Mr.

-Yes; I accompanied the mayor and magistrates, Ewart in my presence.

the military and the constables. Did you. see
Christopher Doyle at that meeting ? ie was in
the chair. Did you know him ? Yes, he was
there personally in the chair. What humber of
ersons were collected at that time ? I really

Mr. Ewart is a gentle-

i an
ne m. E ar
an m
man who accompanied me. I marked it, and
gave it to Mr. Gregory. It has my mark on the
back of it. It is the address of the Executive
Committee.

106
The JUDGE :-The corrections are with pen
and ink-they are in writing ? Yes, my Lord,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-WasI it in
Thenway.
that state when you found it? To the best of
my belief, it was. You do not know in whose
handwriting these corrections are? I do not,
sir. Did you also find a press, and the type
from which this placard had been printed ? I
did, sir. Did you take that too ? I did, sir.
I believe you accompanied M'Mullen to Leach's
house? Yes, I took M'Mullen with me. Well,
I believe that is more correct. Well, did you
see that placard on a board ? I saw it on WedThe JUDGE :-What day did you take Leach?
On Thursday.-On the morning of the 17th, I
saw a placard at Leach's door, and in the evening I took him into custody. You took also the
printer that same day ? Yes, sir. Did you find
another copy of the placard on Leach's counter ?
I did, sir. Did you mark it ? I did, sir. [The
placard is handed to witness, who examines it,
and returns it to the Attorney-General.] That
is the one I found at Leach's, on the counter.
It is marked No. 6.-Leach. Did you also find
this book ? [Hands it to witness.] I did, sir. In
Leach's house ? Yes, sir.' When you first saw
that placard in Leach's shop, where abouts was
it ? It was on a large board six or seven feet
high, outside of Leach's door, and several people
looking at it. Did you go to Carpenters' Hall
on any day? Yes, I did. On what day did
you go to Carpenters' Hall? I was there on
several occasions. Do you remember going on
one day when there was a meeting of some persons, which meeting you interrupted ? I went to
the Hall of Science. On what day was that ?
On the 16th of August. Who did you find
there ? I found Alexander Hutchinson, and a
large number of persons calling themselves delegates. About how many persons did you find
assembled there ? I believe there were several
hundred persons altogether. You say, they
called themselves delegates? The majority of
Do you
them did. the idon know any of them ? I know
youal.know.ot
I
Hutchinson--that is all I know.
The JUDGE :---Is he in the country?
Mr. GREGORY :--No, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--Could you
identify any of the persons by name that you
saw in this assembly as delegates ? No, I could
not. Did you desire them to disperse? I did,
sir. The magistrates went to the room and told
them the meeting was illegal, and that in conse-

quence of it, a large number of persons was col.
lected out-side the room-the magistrates gave
them some minutes to disperse, and they all went
I donot know whether you would be able
to indentify any of the persons in Court, as those
who was there? M'Cartney was there, but I
could not swear to it. Did they afterwards to
your knowledge, assemble any where else ? No,
I was at the Town-hall afterwards, and had to
send officers in various directions, under the
direction of the mayor and magistrates, as chief
superintendent of the police. What was the
number of the military altogether in Manchester, at that time? I never heard the number;
there was a considerable number.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-What
time on the 16th of August, was it that you went
to the Hall of Science, and saw persons assembled there? About eleven o'clock. Is the Hall
of Science a large building ? Yes. And I think
you said there were six or seven hundred there ?
Yes, in the inside of the building. There was a
very large number of persons outside. The
streetbusiness whenfilled. wee told to went Those
was entirely they But they go? about
their
in.the Hall of Science did. You were asked
about the procession that is annually made in
Manchester, on the 16th of August, on Hunt's
festival. Now, I ask you with a view, different
from that of my learned friend, what number of
persons used to attend when first you knew it?
Many thousands of persons when I first saw the
procession. What do you mean by many thousands ? I have seen perhaps five or six thousand,
or more than that. Try again, you are a man with
an eye for numbers, you know ? I cannot say more
than five or six thousand. Now, you have stated
that latterly the procession has rather declined ?
Very much so indeed. What should you say has
been the number of persons collected in the last
two or three years, on the 16th of August ? I very
much doubt there having been a meeting at all on
the last year. But on the last occasion that you
had an opportunity of seeing it ? Two thousand.
Now, where was this procession to go from, and
to? From New-cross to St. Peter's-fields, Peter'sstreet. What distance was this demonstration
as people call it? About half a mile. Did the
people go with banners and music? Yes. Were
the public authorities in Manchester apprized
and aware of these processions ? Yes. Were
such processions generally preceded by announcements, or placards? Yes, I think I always
observed that to be the case. Did you see any
announcement of such procession, a few days
before the 16th of August last year? I speak
to you as a police authority-did you see anything that would lead you to expect such a procession on the last 16th of August. I was aware

107
that such a procession was intended, and I also
knew that it was not to take place. Well, that
is another answer. The police, of course, would
have their eye on that day on account of such
procession ? Yes, of course. You said just now
that you knew sometime before that such pro.
cession would not take place? I was aware of it.
How short a time before the 16th of August?
I knew on the 15th.
Cross-examined by Mr. BAINES :-What was
the earliest time you were aware of the existence
of that placard, which you call the " Executive
Placard ?" On the morning of the 17th. What
time ? I believe about nine o'clock. You are
aware, I believe, that in consequence of some
information or other, a warrant was then out
against Mr. O'Connor? Yes. When was the
first time that you knew of the existence of that
warrant? Was it before that day or not ? Not
before that day. It was I who had the execution of the warrant.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- A warrant
against whom, my Lord ?
Mr. BAINES:-I should like to see it produced. I want to know the day. I am not exactly aware of the day. You are not aware when
the warrant against Mr. O'Connor was taken
out; but you think the 17th ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-There was no
warrant out against Mr. O'Connor on that day.
Mr. BAINES :-Yes, he says there was.
The WITNESS :-No; I have made a mistake. The warrant I am speaking about was
against Dr. M'Douall.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-.y learned
friend will excuse me, I was so satisfied that the
thing did not exist, that I was inviting his attention to it.
Mr. BAINES:-Now, I understand you that
processions of the kind you have spoken of have
taken place ever since the 16th of August, 1819,
and the object of these processions you are
aware is to commemorate the transactions of a
certain day in that year in connexion with Henry
Hunt ? Yes. I believe you say these were much
less fully attended than when you saw them?
Yes. Now, doyou not know that in 1840 ground
was given in Mr. Scholefield's burying.ground
for erecting a public monument to the memory
of Mr. Hunt? I heard that one was erected, but
I am not awvare of the exact time; I think it
was about twelve months ago,
The JUDGE :-In 1840 - I do not know the
time, my Lord. It was about twelve months,

ago. Do you not know that, in the spring of
last year, the first stone of the monument was
laid, and it attracted great attention ? Yes, it
did. I believe Mr. O'Connor attended on the
occasion of laying the first stone (which took
place on Good Friday), and there was a great
deal of public interest excited in respect of it in
the town of Manchester ? I believe he was there.
Probably you are aware of this, that it was publicly announced that the opening of the monument would take place on the 16th of August
last year ? I heard such a report. In fact on the
anniversary of Mr. Hunt's death? Yes. Now,
are you aware it had been publicly announced a

long time before that there would be a general
meeting on that day of all persons friendly to
such principles, for the purpose of witnessing the
opening, and also for the purpose of healing certain differences that existed among different
branches of the Chartist body ? No, I did not hear
that. Now, although you say that the interest in
this procession had fallen off and flagged, the erection of this monument caused great excitement
in Manchester; and there was a great deal of
public interest shewn in the matter ? No. But
I am asking you as first police-constable of Manchester, if you have not sworn that such was the
fact? Yes. Now, tell me, if you please, what
was the first time, to your knowledge, any stoppage of a mill took place in Manchester ? Before
the 16th-on the 10th-Wednesday morning.
Then before that time there had been none ? I
cannot say that, sir.-I was absent. Then before that time there was none ? 0 no, none to
my knowledge. Now, I was going to call your
attention to something that took place a fortnight 'before this. Were you not aware that
notices of this description were plaearded most
extensively in the town of Manchester ,"1
HUNT'S MONUMENT.
" Men of Manchester, Salford, and the surrounding towns and villages, be at your posts 1
-In conformity with the announcement of the
committee in the placards previously hissaued, we
hereby give instructions to be observed on the
16th August, 1842, when
" A GRAND PROCESSION
" 'Will take place to celebrate the completion of
the monument, in memory of the late
"4HENRY HUNT, ESQ,
" Those trades who resolve to join in the procession are requested to meet the members of
the National Charter Association, and other
friends of Henry Hunt, in Stevenson's-square,
precisely at ten o'clock in the forenoon, where
the procession willbe formed, and thence march
in due oxder, leaded and conducted by tvwo
Marshals, through the following streets :

108
iamely, Lever-street, Piccadilly, London-road, to Now it was on the morning of the 10th that you
Ardwick-green, there to meet the patriot
first knew of the stoppage of any mill in Man"O'CONNOR.
chester. I want to ask you whether on the
"After which to move down Rusholme-road, same day, the 10th, you did not see this bill plaOxford-road," Peter-street, passing which the
bands are instructed to play The Dead March.' carded through the streets of Manchester ?
" The committee for the erection of Hunt's moIt will next move along Deansgate, St. Ann'ssquare, Market-street, Oldham-street, Oldham- nument respectfully informs the public, that, in
road, Butler-street, to the Rev. J. Scholefield's consequence of the very unexpected excitement
burial-grond, where eargus O'Connor, Esq.,of the town ofManchester and its vicinity, occaand the delegates from various parts of the coun- they have decided that the procession as antry, will address the people.
nounced in former bills, for the 16th of August,
"GABRIEL
IHARGREAVES. Marshals 1842, ' will not take place,' lest it should give an
"iTHOMAS RAILTON.
J
opportunity to increase that excitement, the
urgently and respect- odium and consequences of which have been at"The committee :o.st
fully that all who join the procession will tempted to be fixed on the Chartist body.
beg
"The meeting will be held on the premises of
observe the same sobriety and docorum for which
the Rev. J. Scholefield, where the monument can
our former gatherings have been so admirably be seen. The gates will be opened at ten o'clock

distinguished, and thus give another indication of and the meeting will be addressed by Feargos
our regard for PEACE, LAW, and ORDER.

" There will be a tea party and ball in the
Carpenters' Hall on the same evening, at which
Mr. O'Connor has promised to be lresent. Tea
on the table at five o'clock in the afternoon.
Tickets for which may be had, price Is., by applying to Messrs. Heywood,Oldham-street; Wie,
Great Ancoats-street ; Cooper, Bridge-street;
rreat Ancoats-street ; Cooper, Bridge-street;
Leach, Oak-street : and on Sunday evenings, at
Carpenters' Hall.
"The gates of the premises on which the monument is erected will be opened to the public at
ten o'clock in the forenoon. Admission, one
penny. The money to be added to the monunent fund.
(" Signed on behalf of the Committee,)
"WM. GRIFFIN, Secretary.
"JAMES SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman.
"Committee Rooms, Every-street, Manchester.
Aug. 1, 1842.
Now, I ask you, as a fair man, had you not,
on the day that this bears date, 10 days before
the stoppage of the first mill in Manchester, seen
it most extensively circulated ? I believe I had
seen it; but I was absent from Manchester for
seven days at the Liverpool Assizes. I think I
had seen it.

The JUDGE :-Before you went there? Before I went there, my Lord.
Mr. BAINES :-This burial-ground that we
have heard spoken of is burial-ground attached
a
to the chapel of which Mr. Scholefield officiates
as dissenting minister? It is. It is one of
those called or " Bible Christians,"
Cowherdites,
those called
Cowherdites, or "Bible Christians,"
of which you have several in Manchester? We
have one in Salford. I do not know that we
have any in Manchester. They are sometimes
called Cowherdites, from Mr. Cowherd their

O'Connor, Esq., and other delegates, at eleven

o'clock.
" The tea party and ball, as by former bills, will
take place in the evening at Carpenters' Hall.
" N.B A number of very neat China models
of the monument have arrived, and will be exposed for sale on that day, at from s. 4d. to
Is. 6d. each, the profits of which are for the funds
of the monument."
Idare say you remember seeing that ? I remember seeing a bill stating that the procession would
not take place, and requesting the members to
meet in Mr. Scholefield's house. And assigning
as a reason the very unexpected turn-out for an
advance of wages ? I cannot speak to the body of
the bill. All I can remember is, that a bill was
issued, stating that the procession would not take
place, and requesting the members to meet at
Mr. Scholefield's house.
By the COURT:-When was that? I do not
know the date, my Lord. I am sure if you will
apply your mind, you will remember when it
took place ? I believe it was the 15th. Will you
allow me to call your attention to when the proclamation of the Queen was received in Manchester. That proclamation was issued, I beprolieve, in Manchester on the on the and theNow,
clamation of the magistrates 15th, 14th.
I ask you whether, immediately after the prohibition of the procession, this bill was not very
extensively issued throughout the town of Manchester ?
" Procession and Meeting prohibited by the
Authorities. -The committee for the erection of
Hunt' s monument respectfully inform the public,
that in consequence of the very unexpected excitement of the town of Manchester and its vicinity, occasioned by a turn-out for an advance of
wages, they have decided that the procession and
meeting jn Mr. Scholefield's premises, as announcedinformer billsforthe l6thofAugust, 1842,
will not take place, lest it should give an opportru-

founder, and sometimes Bible Christians ? I do nity to increase that excitement, the odium and

total abstinence, consequences of which have been attempted to be
not know that. Their tenets a:e
and abstinence from animal food? Yes.
Mr. Scholefield belongs to the body ?

And fixed on the Chartist body.1a
Yes. take place in the evening, at Carpenters' Hall.

109
"N.B. A number of very neat China models of
the monument have arrived, and will be exposed
for sale on that day, at from Is. 4d. to Is. 6d.
each; the profits of which are for the funds of the
monurment.
"J. SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
I heard so, but I cannot say positively.
The ATTORNEt-GENERAL:-You may
take it that it was.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON:-YouJ
stated that, on the 15th, you went to the Hall of
Science, and saw a number of persons calling
themselves delegates. Now just recollect, did
not they call themselves trades' delegates? They
said they were delegates, but I do not know whether they said trades' delegates or not. Do you
know that there had been people in Manchester
calling themselves trades' delegates ? I know
there had been such persons. About that period,
and shortly before the 16th? Yes. And I suppose your memory is not sufficiently distinct to
enable you to say that they called themselves
trades' delegates ? No; I cannot remember
whether they said trades' delegates or not.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now,
Beswick, I will ask you a question; you say that
you saw the placard headed "The Executive
Committee" posted upon a board outside Mr.
Leach's door ? Yes, on a board. What is Leach
by calling? A dealer in publications, and a
printer. And a newsvender? Yes. Now, sir,
I ask you on your oath, if you are not aware
that when any parties belonging to any association or society whatever, print bills of any kind,
they do not immediately send them to the several newsvenders in the town, and that it is a
common practice for them to paste them on
boards, and place them outside their doors ? I
am not aware of that. Have you passed Hayward's? I have. Have you not seen them
there ? -Have you not seen placards there ? I
have seen them. Then why did you not tell me
so.-Have you passed Cooper's? I have seen
some boards there. Have you passed Willis's?
I can't remember. Have you ever passed or
seen boards ? I do not remember. Have you
seen at Hayward's, Cooper's, Wallis's, and at
other places, placards wholly unconnected with
their business? With respect to Hayward's, I
can't say. Have you at Cooper's? I have.
Have you seen placards on the doors of the newsvenders, headed " Murder, murder, murder;"
and containing a great deal oL an exciting
nature? When newspapers are sold there, I
have. Have you not seen them independently of
newspapers?

The ATTORNEY-GE ERAL :-What kind
of placards?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I think I was very ex.
plicit.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My impetu.
osity does not proceed from me, but from the
witness not answering. [To witness] Have
you not seen placards posted outside newsven.
ders' shops of a more exciting character than
that ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
I think that question is not right.
By the COURT:-He says he frequently saw
exciting placards of newsmen relating to the newspapers they had to sell.
Mr. O'CONIOR:-You have been in the
Manchester police for thirteen or fourteen years ?
Yes. Have you known, for the last six or seven
years, that it was the constant practice of many

to attend these demonstrations on the 16th of
August? I have often seen you during the years
I have been in Manchester upon these occasions.
The meetings that were to come off had been
known to the authorities ? Yes; generally. There
has never been any interference with those meetings ? I am not aware that the authorities ever
interfered with them. There was nothing calling
for their interference ?-No particular breach ot

the peace ? I have seen breaches of the peace
committed there. I dare say you have. Were
you aware, of your own knowledge, that for several weeks before the 16th of last August, it
was understood that a meeting of delegates was
to take place on the 17th, on the day after the
demonstration ? I was not aware. I think you
stated, in answer to Mr. Baines, that there was
no warrant against me till M'Mullen was sent
to London to arrest me? I said my belief was
that there was none till then. Do you know
what date was the warrant? I don't know.
Was it after the 20th of September ? I believe
it was after the 20th of September that
Now, you being an active
M'Mullen went.
officer, of course you made it your business to

inquire into all the circumstances connected with
the disturbances in the town of Manchester ?When did you find that the people began to return to their work after the 16th of August ?
By the COURT :-It has been stated that
they began to return before that ? Withess:I don't believe that any of the mills were opened
for three weeks.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-What not till the 5th of
September ?-About then-not for a fortnight or
tlhee weeks ? I think not. Do you mean to tell

110
the three days on which I received the worst
reports.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I have no more to ask
you.
Cross-examined by the defendant JAMES
LEACH :-You have stated, that people in the
habit of selling newspapers ~nd books, are accustomed to have boards at their doors ? Yes, I believe they are. I have seen them frequently. And
door
the that purpose? Yes, was a board used
for board you saw at my I should fancy so
r
her
mys
t ba yu sa
On the board you saw at my door, were there
answer your questions.
not several placards? There were a number of
WITNESS:-Mr. O'Connor puts his ques- placards when you took it away, were there not?
them.
tions, and does not let me answer them.
tions, does not let me answer
and
I only saw two, Run for Gold, and the ExecuBy the COURT :-At what time did you send tive Placard. At what time in the day did you
protection to the mills ? As soon as the people
to-re:XoI esn
ofc styseize
it ? I should think about eleven in the
wished to return to work, I senTofficers to various seize it? I should think about eleven in the
the morning. The placard now before the court
mills; but that was not till three weeks after
appears to have been pasted on a great number
turn-out,
Mr. O'CONNOR:-When did the town of of other placards ? I cannot exactly say. [WitManchester begin to resume its usual tranquil- ness looks at the placard] : Yes, it is so. Are
lity? It was about seven weeks before all the you not aware that when bill-stickers go out
hands went in. That was not my question. I with bills, they are in the habit of pasting them
asked, when did Manchester resume its usual on the boards at the doors of newsmen? I am
tranquillity; and not when the hands went in not aware of it. At what time did you first see
to work.-A town may be tranquil, though many the placard at my door? From half-past ten to
hands in it may be idle.-Idle men walking about eleven o'clock. Have you any reason to believe
the street is no proof of disturbance ? I should I was not at home at the time ? Yes; I have
say, something like a fortnight after the 9th. reason to believe it ; I believe you were not at
That brings us to Tuesday, 23rd of August, in- home at
stead of Monday, the 22nd. Which was the
worst and most excited day in Manchester ? I shop. In what position was the board in the
was there on the Wednesday, but I went to Liver- shop when you did come on the night of the
pool on the Thursday. When I returned, I sent 17th? The board was in the shop, and the bills
out officers by order of the mayor, and therefore were upon it. It was a large board, about six or
I am not in a position to answer you myself. seven feet high. And you have reason to beWhy, how can you be in a better position to in- lieve that I was not at home? You were not in
form yourself of the state of the t6wn than at the the shop, certainly ; for I looked as I passed.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENEhead of a police force ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-That would RAL:-You have been asked about Hunt's
monument.
It is, I believe, erected in
be only by hearsay.
WITNESS:-If reports made to me will sa- Mr. Scholefield's burial-ground ? It is so.
Whereabout is it in Manchester ? It is
tisfy you, I will give you reports.
Mr. O'CONNER:-Do you mean to say that near Etvery-street, Ancoats-lane, Manchester.
you cannot tell me the state of Manchester from Is there a burial-ground round the chapel ?
your own knowledge ? I was confined for a month There is, sir. Is there any communication
in the Town-hall, and not allowed by the magis- across the back-road from one burial-ground
trates to go into the town. I was confined by to another? There are two ways. Is there a
day and often by night. Not by night, for you communication under the road, under an archwent down to Leach's shop by night.-You were way, taking you to the other burial-ground ?
there
tainy. I wented the Town-hall at five in the Yes, it leads into some fields. What is the size
morning, and was frequently confined there till a of the farther burial-ground-how many acres?
late hour at night. What was the day on which I should think about three or four acres. What
you received the worst report? After I returned is the size of the upper burial-ground in which
to town, I should say the Wednesday, Thursday, the chapel itself is ? Rather smaller. Iow
and Friday, the 10th, 11th and 12th August, Were many entrances are there to Scholefield's chapel ?
me that the men did not return to their work at
Manchester on the 22nd of August, and that after
then it became general, and that there were not
meetings between masters and men on the subject ? I only know this, that when the men went
to work I was obliged, by the instructions of the
mayor, to send officers to protect them. Then
they did return-if you were to furnish them with
protection ? Yes : but it was after the time.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Pray give
the witness breathing time,--give him time to

111i
There are five or six altogether--three from Joshua Hobson, of Leeds, in the county of York,
Every-street; one from the back part of the printer, that the aforesaid Feargus O'Connor
burial-ground; one from the side; and one solemnly declared and said that he was the sole
from the lower burial-ground,
proprietor of the said Northern Star, and that
Mr. BAINES :-A question has been put by Joshua Hobson was the printer of it, and that it
the Attorney-General, about the size of the was to be printed at his printing-office at Nos.
burial-ground. I wish your Lordship would ask 12 and 13, Market-street, Leeds, in the county
the witness on that point again, because I under- of York, and published at the house of the said
stand that it is not more than an acre and a Joshua Hobson, at No. 5, in the same street.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Here is a
half.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I am quite copy of the Northern Star of Saturday, the 20th
content to take it at your own size. Nothing- of August, 1842, (reading the imprint), "Printed
depends on that. Do you mean the lower at Leeds, for the proprietor, Feargus O'Connor,
IEsq., of Hammersmith, in the county of Midburial-ground, or the whole altogether ?
Mr. BAINES:-No; the whole altogether. I dlesex, by Joshua Hobson, at his printing-office,
WITNESS :-I am not a good judge of land, Nos. 12 and 13, Market-street, Briggate, and
published by the said Joshua Hobson, for the
but I should think they were more than that.
buThe
ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I will admit said Feargus O'Connor, at his office, No. 5,
TheMarket-street,"
&c. I propose to read these
the statement of my learned friend altogether,
passages;-one is headed " Meeting of delegates
Mr. BAINES :-Well, we must take the in conference at Manchester." The paper was
statement of some person competent to give a then handed to the officer of the court, and he
satisfactory answer.
was about reading the articles in question, when
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he was
Mr. WILLIAM DRAKE was then called, and
examined by Mr. J. S. WORTLEY:-Did you requested by Mr. O'Connor, to ask that the
apply to the office of stamps and taxes for a article might be read to-morrow morning instead
certificate of the proprietor of the Northern of to-night.
The learned JUDGE enquired if there was
Star? Yes, and I saw the commissioner, Mr.
sign the one now produced, any other witnesses who could then be called ?
Seymour Montague,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-No, my
compared it with the original deafter we had after wehad it with the original de- Lord; there is no other witnesses which it would
compared
claration.
be convenient to take to-night.
The certificate was then read by Mr. WORTThe JUDGE :-Very well, then the case may
LEY. It purported to be the copy of a decla- stop for to-night, and I shall try the undefended
ration made by Feargus O'Connor, Esq., of causes. The trial was then adjourned at seven
lHammersmith, in the county of Middlesex, and o'clook until the following morning.

END

ilF

T'IRR'

PAYS TRAI.

TRIAL OF FEARGUS

O'CONNOR,

ESQ.,

AND OTHERS.

FOURTH

DAY,

Saturday, March 4th, 1843.

Mr. BARON ROLFE took his seat on the bench this morning at nine o'clock.
A WITNESS:-My Lord, I am subpoenaed here on behalf of the defendants,
and I have not money to enable me to remain. I am not able to support myself.
The JUDGE :-You should have asked that before; I have no jurisdiction in
the matter, and you must exercise your own discretion whether you remain or not.
The FOREMAN:-My Lord, I have been requested by my brother Jurors to
apply to your Lordship for permission to leave town this evening by the five o'clock
train, and to return on Monday morning. Not a gentleman on the jury has been
prepared for a stay of more than forty-eight hours, and, therefore, they have been
considerably inconvenienced.
regret the circumstance, and I am sorry that, at present, I
The JUDGE :-I
cannot give any decisive answer, but I will see what progress the trial will make
to-day : as I am suffering under a severe cold I can have no objection, personally,
to comply with the request, but it is necessary that the business should be go
through with as little delay as possible.
When the ATTORNEY-GELNERAL came into Court, the Judge mentioned it
to him, and he said, they should not gain more than an hour and a half by sitting
till seven o'clock; and, at any personal sacrifice to himself, he was ready to consent
to adjourn in time to allow the jurors to go home by the train at half-past five.
The JUDGE:--The great object on the part of the Crown is to dispose of the
public business with the least possible delay. I have no objection to say I will not
sit later than five.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, it would be necessary for them to
leave the Court at least half an hour before the last train starts.
The JUDGE :-At what time will that be ?
A JUROR :-Half-past five o clock, my Loid.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-l know, my Lord, from attending frequently
at Guildhall, the inconvenience of men of business in returning late home on
Saturday night. By refusing the application we should not gain more than an hour,
or half an hour, while the convenience to the Jury would be invaluable. My Lord,
I would submit to any inconvenience, on my own part, in order to accommodate the
Jurors in this respect.
The FOREMAN, on the part of the Jury, thanked the Attorney-General for his
consideration.

113
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then put in
the Northern Star, of the 20th August, 1842,
from which the Officer of the Court read the following article :MEETING OF DELEGATES IN CONFERENCE, AT MANCHESTER.
"This body was driven by the' troublous
times' from the consideration of the particular
matters and things for which it was summoned.
The all-absorbing interest of the' strike' movement was forced on the attention of its members as a first object of consideration. It being
known that the sitting of this body was to commence on Monday, it was generally understood
and believed that they would take up the subject; arid the decision to which they might
come as to the course of action to be commend-

amendment was proposed, differing from the resolution in phraseology, but having the same
purport. Another amendment was proposed to
the effect that-' The information laid before
this conference by the several delegates of whom
it is composed does not warrant this conference
in now recommending to the people any national
strike or holyday, or in anyway mixing up the
Chartist name and movement with the present
strike for wages, subsisting in some districts, and
originated, as this conference believes, by the
Anti-corn-law League; not seeing any means
whereby the said strike can now be made a successful effort for the carrying of the People's
Charter; while at the same time this conference
deeply sympathise with their oppressed brethren
on strike, and admire the spirit of energyv and

ed, was looked for by hundreds of thousands
withl an intenseness of anxiety perfectly indescribLable. Tie conference commenced its session on Tuesday, at two P.M., and continued, by
adjournments, till about seven on Wednesday
evening. Their deliberations were, as might be
expected, most anxious; the discussions most
animated and earnest, and while some difference
of opinion prevailed on the course to be recommended to the people, one soul and purpose
seemed to animate the entire assembly as to the
necessity of enforcing, by every means in their
individual and collective power, the observance
of peace, law, and order by and among the
people. Each member, in the first instance,
stated to the conference, so far as he had the
means of knowing it, the state of his own district, and the opinion of his constituents in reference to ' the strike.'
"A general, anxious, and protracted discussion then ensued upon the question of adopting
the following
RESOLUTION OF THE DELEGATES.
" 'That whilst the Chartist body did not originate the present cessation from labour, this
conference of delegates from various parts of
England express their deep sympathy with their
constituents, the working men now on strike;
and that we strongly approve the extension and
continuance of their present struggle, till the
People's Charter becomes a legislative enactment, and decide, forthwith, to issue an address
to that effect; and pledge ourselves, on our return to our respective localities, to give a proper
direction to the people's efforts.?' Every speaker
was restricted to five minutes, and no man allowed to speak tiice on the same question. An

patriotism with which the trades of Manchester,
and at other places, have declared for the
People's Charter, and express their earnest hope
that the energies of those bodies, and all other
bodies of the people will be unceasingly continued with increasing ardour and determination,
until the enactment of that document be secured.
" After almost every member had spoken
upon the question, it was put, and the original
resolution carried by a large majority.
" It is but fair to state that a considerable
majority of delegates were from the districts
actually out and taking part in the struggle.
After the adoption of the above resolution, the
following address was agreed to nem. con. The
mover and supporters of the amendment deeming it both unnecessary and unwise to maintain
an opposition, which, from being persisted in
when seen to be powerless, might justly have
been considered factious."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-(To the officer of the Court)-Read the next paragraph
headed
ADDRESS OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE TO THE CHARTIST PUBLIC.
"Brother Chartists,-Those who have steeped
you in poverty, and accumulated vast incomes
by your labour, have turned upon you even
in your distress, and would plunge you yet
lower in the gulph of misery.
Failing
to purchase your aid for the accomplishment of their own sordid ends, they have effectually put into force the doctrinre that
" man has a right to do what he likes with his
own ;" and, in the hope of starving you into
compliance with their will, they have paralysed
the hand of labour of the old and the yonug.

114
Yea, infancy and old age are alike instruments
in their hands for enhancing the interests of
their order. Willing still to labour for a bare
pittance, and watching events peacefully, which
miht lead to the attainment of your just rights,
and thereby render you independent of theoppressor's will, you were cast upon the wide
world for support. Thanks-eternal thanks to
the brave and independent Trades of Manchester! They saw the evil, and nobly threw their
comparative comfort into misery's scale. They
have struck, not for wages, but for principle:
and, regardless of consequences to themselves,
they have taken the foreground in your cause.
They have declared that they will cease to toil
till all labour shall be justly requited; which, in
their opinion, cannot be effected till the Charter
become law. Must not their names be handed
down to posterity as patriots, sacrificing their
own convenience and comfort for the attainment
of that of their fellow-men ? Who can withhold praise from such men ? You have not
struck-you have been stricken; but let the
stroke recoil upon the tyrants who have so
cruelly arrayed themselves against the interests
of labour.
" Brothers, these are not times to hesitate!
The corn has a golden hue while your visages
are pale, but hope for change and better times.
We are fortunate in having an accredited executive, bearing the confidence of all, at our
head."
" They, too, have called upon you. You will
read their address : it breathes a bold and manly
spirit."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
that is the document alluded to as the Executive
address, which we have put in evidence; and I
think it right, my Lord, to state, that I shall draw
attention to that paragraph bye and bye, for the
purpose of shewing that it refers to the Executive
committee of the National Chartists' Association.
I make this statement now, in order that I shall
not hereafter be accused of doing it prematurely,
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Do I understand the Attorney-General to mean, that from that paragraph
in the Northern Star, he intends to fasten the
National Address on the Conference ?
The JUDGE :-He fastens the Northern Star
on Mr. O'Connor, and from that he reads an address containing this passage :-" We are fortunate in having an accredited executive bearing the
confidence of all, at our head They, too, have
called upon you. You will read their address, it
breathes a bold and manly spirit."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The Ad-

dress alluded to is that contained in what is called
"the Executive Placard."
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I object to this being
T
evidence.
he OFFICER of the COURT proceeds :opresent, withWe could not, in times like the
port, as in union alone is security to be found,
and from unanimity alone can success be expected." This is not a voluntary "holiday." It
is the forced " strike" of ill-requited labour
against the dominion of all-powerful capital. But
as the tyrants have forced the alternative upon
you, adopt it-and out of the oppressor's threat
let freedom spring."
" While we have not been the originators of,
we are yet bold enough to say to those who adopt
the oppressor's remedy, stick to it rather than beraher
e op sors ey , s
come tools for your own destruction; and may he
who has a bit to spare, and would refuse it to men
struggling for their rights, feel the gripe of hunger, and the still more stinging grief of a crying
offspring !"
"Brothers.-If we are worthy of your confidence, we must prove that we merit your esteem.
Hear us, then, and mark well our admonition.
Let no act of yours take the odium from those
who have goaded you into resistance, and who
would now torture you, because you do resist. Be
not deceived; for although the discomfited Whigs
have attemptedor althoug theirscomfited forces
under this
in society, of whatever shade in politics, join with
them in throwing upon you the odium which belongs to your oppressors. But, heed them not.
Our's is the battle of labour against capital-of
poverty against property-of right against might
-of justice against injustice-and of knowledge
against bigotry and intolerance."
"This is a holiday, proclaimed not by naturemost unnaturally proclaimed; and may the wicked
fall into the pit which they have dug."
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, in the Attorney-General's opening speech, he told the jury
that the Northern Star, or anything contained in
it, could only be evidence against me; now, if he
means this to be evidence of the Executive Address, he must shew that it only applies to me.
The JUDGE:-That is only a matter of observation. While the paragraph was reading, the
Attorney-general thought that part might have
escaped observation. He means to say, that the
person who wrote this in the Northern Star referred to the Executive Placard, and whatever
be the inference from that, I cannot yet say.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I wished,
my Lord, that there might be no mistake on that
point.
The OFFICER proceeds:-" Let union and

116
peace be the watchword. We counsel you against station. TheBirmingham and London station ?
waging warfare against recognized authority, Yes, sir.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :- Do
while we believe the moral strength of an united
people to be sufficiently powerful, when well di- you know Pope Joe? Yes. He is a cab-driver,
rected, to overcome all the physical force that too? Yes. Did you see him and another lately
Te
thI
tyranny can summon to its aid. The blood of Yes. Wereyouc man
your brothers has been shed while peacefully ye
. Were you incompany
agitating for their rights ; and the brave delegates day evening last? No. Were you in company
of the trades of Manchester, have been scattered with M'Mullin and two cabmen on Tuesday
from their place of meeting, at the point of the last? o. You were not in company with him
bayonet; yet, will the friends of justice ever and two of them; and it was not said to you,
find a refuge as long as nature's canopy stands, that you should all have one word, and that you
was not to you
and so long as those for whom they struggle should know it? No, sir. It
stand by them. As the people appear to have that was said ? No, sir.
ROBERT BELL was next called and sworn.
made the " strike of the League," for a repeal
of the Corn-laws into a stand for principle and
Mr. O'CONNOR :-To save the time of the
the Charter, we would implore every man loving court, my Lord, if these men are merely cabmen,
justice and having a shilling at his command to I shall admit all that the Attorney-General
advance it, upon the good understanding that wants to prove by them.
free labour will ere long repay the loan.
The JUDGE:-The last cabman, Mr. O'Con"Brothers, the trades have issued a noble address. It breathes a spirit worthy of old laws nor, drove you from the Birmingham and London
and old English liberties. This, brothers, is the station.
Mr. HILDYARD :-The station is at Mantime for courage, prudence, caution, watchfulchester, my Lord, and the witness speaks of it
ness and resolution.
" In conclusion, brothers, we would, above all as the Birmingham station. It belongs to the
things, council you against the destruction of life new company at Crewe.
ROBERT BELL, examined by Mr. POLor property.
" Remain firm to your principles, which are LOCK :-You were employed by the Manchesto be found in the document entitled the Peo- ter police? Yes. On the 16th of August, were
I
pIe's Charter."
you, in the afternoon, walking about Mr. ScholeplMen, be wise do not commit yourselves orCharter."
's
Mr. O'Connor
your cause. Let all your acts be strictly legal field's chapel? Yes. Did you see
and constitutional, and ere long your enemies that day? I saw him in the evening.
will discover that labour is in truth the source of The JUDGE :-What do you mean by th
wealth, and should be the only source of power. evening ? Between six and seven o'clock.
Mr,. POLLOCK :-Did you see him go to
Immediately after the adoption of the address,
it was resolved unanimously, " That the thanks Mr. Scholefield's chapel ? Yes. Did you see any
of the Conference be given to the Executive, for one go in with him? I saw another man, but I
their energetic labours on behalf of the people." don't know him, and I saw several persons going
And it was then resolved unanimously-"That in in the course of the day. Was the chapel
this conference do now disolve." And the dele- lighted up then ? It was, sir. Were you at
gates immediately dispersed to their several the same place on the following day (Wednesday,
the 17th) ? I was about every street on the 17th.
homes,
JAMES HINDLEY, examined by Mr. Did you ever see M'Douall? Idid. I saw him
HILDYARD :-You live at Manchester? Yes. coming out of Mr. Scholefield's chapel. At what
You are the driver of the fly No. 10 ? Yes. On time? About eleven and a half in the morning.
The JUDGE:-At what time? About halfthe morning of the 16th of August, were you
employed to drive any one ? Yes; I drove Mr. past eleven, my Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK:-Did you see him return
O'Connor to Mr. Scholefield's on that morning.
Did you sete himagain in
a quarter few minutesafter.
At what time in the morning? About
past five the train was due, but it generally ar- the course of the day, or at night? No, sir. Did
rives at half past. Where did you take him up ? you see any persons leave the chapel that afternoon ? I did, sir. At what time ? Between three
In Every-street.
The JUDGE:-Is that the defendant Schole- and four o'clock, sir.
The JUDGE:-What did you say? I saw
field ?
Mr. HILDYARD :-Yes, my Lord.-Where several other persons leaving the chapel.
did you take O'Connor up ? At the Birmingham

Mr. POLLOCK :-How many do you think ?

116
About twenty, sir, Can you speak to any of
them? Campbell was one, Christopher Doyle,
and M'Cartney---The JUDGE:-Is that the defendant Campbell ?
Mr. HILYARD :-Yes, my Lord? Did you
see any of those persons returning again ? I did.
How many ? Perhaps about twenty or more of
them returned in about an hour. Can you speak
to them ? There were Campbell, Christopher
Doyle, and a man named John Allinson.
The JUDGE:--Do you know, is he one of
the defendants? He was one of the party that
came out of the chapel. You don't know wheNo, my
ther he is one of the defendants?
Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK :-Is he here ? I cannot speak
to him. On the morning of the 18th did you see
Mr. O'Connor? Yes; I saw Mr. Scholefield and
him leaving Mr. Scholefield's house on the 18th,
in a cab. Which way did he drive ? To the Manchester and Birmingham Railway. In Storestreet ? Yes. Of course you did not followhim?
No. Were you before the magistrates ? No.
Cross-examined by Mr. BAINES :-What was
the day you were first there? The 16th; that
was Tuesday. Were any persons with you ?
Yes. Who were they ? A man named Higgins,
and another of the name of M'Clelland. Where
were you then ? In Every-street. Just so; and
What
the others were in Every-street ? Yes.
was the earliest time you speak to seeing any
of those persons going to Scholefield's house ?
I saw M'Douall coming out of Scholefields on
that day. On the 16th ? Yes, at half-past 11
o'clock.
Mr. MURPHY:-He said on the 17th before.
Mr. DUNDAS :-No, I think it was not so.
Well, half-past eleven is the earliest time you
speak to; what time did you go to Every-street
that morning? About nine o'clock, sir. I think
you said you were there on the 17th ? I was,
8ir. What was the earliest time on the 17th at
which you saw any of the persons mentioned as
being there that day? About one o'clock in the
afternoon. Where were they then ? They were
going to Scholefield's. From Every-street ? Yes.
That would be, of course, broad day? Yes. What
time was it you saw Mr. Feargus O'Connor
coming out to go in this cab ? Half-past eight
in the morning. There is, I believe, a train at
three o'clock in the morning, if Mr. O'Connor
was disposed to go by it? I cannot say. Don't
you know that there is a train leaving in the
night? I cannot tell that. But, however, the

fact is that Mr. O'Connor was coming out at
half-past eight o'clock of an August morning in
a cab ? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY: - Who
are the parties you saw? The parties I mentioned.
Well, mention them again to me, as it is important that I should know them ? Campbell,
Doyle, M'Cartney, and Allinson.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now,
Bell, I have a word with you. You say I came
in a cab to Mr. Scholefield's in the morning ?
No, sir. Did not you see me arrive from the
Birmingham station on the morning of the 16th?
I did not. When did you at first see me at Mr.
Scholefield's ? In the evening of that day. What
was the earliest period you went there in the
How long did you
morning ? Nine o'clock.
remain there ? Three or four hours. You heard
that there was to be a meeting that morning on
a private piece of ground belonging to Mr.
Scholefield ? Yes. Was it for that purpose yon
went there ? I was sent there to watch the proceedings of Mr. Feargus O'Connor and others.
You were sent there on Tuesday the 16th to
watch the proceedings of Feargus O'Connor and
others ? I was. You swear that? Yes. Were
you told what the nature of their proceedings
were to be? No. Did you see when you came
to Mr. Scholefield's, on the morning of Tuesday,
a placard, announcing that there would be no
meeting ? Yes. You saw Mr. Scholefield's son
himself putting one up on a wall announcing
that there would be no meeting? Yes, I did.
The JUDGE : - Who did you see? Mr.
Scholefield's son putting a placard on the wall
announcing that there would be no meeting.
Mr. MURPHY [To Mr. O'Connor] :-It is
most important for you that.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-How many hours did you
remain there? I said about three, sir. You remained about three hours? Yes, from nine
o'clock. You did not see me during that time ?
No, sir. The first time you saw Feargus O'Connor
was about five o'clock in the afternoon.
THOMAS NOBLETT, examined by Mr.
WORTLEY:-Where do you live? In Man.
chester. Does your mother keep a public-house
there? Yes, sir. What is the name of the
house? The Queen's Stores. Were you living
there with her in August last ? Yes, sir.
Where is the house? In Whittle - street
Were you at home on the 16th of August ? Yes.
Do you know M'Douall? Yes, sir. Did he
come to your house that morning? Yes. Wha

117
time-? About nine o'clock in the morning. Did
your mother show him a room up-stairs ? Yes,
sir. Did he go up-stairs with her ? He went up
first. Did he remain up-stairs sometime ? A
short time. How long ? About five or ten
minutes. Did he 'afterwards go up-stairs again ?
Yes, he went up several times. While he was
-up-stairs did, any other persons come? Yes.
How soon after did they come to your house ?About-I don't want it to a minute? 0, there
were several-a great many persons came backwards and forwards. How soon did the first
come ? I cahnot say; there were a great many
in the house at the time. How soon did the
first person go up to M'Douall? My mother
went up. But I ask you about men.--Did they
go up? Yes. How soon after? About an hour.
How many men went up-stairs to his room? I
cannot say. Well-about? I cannot say, I did not
go into the room, nor see them go up. Did you
see them up-stairs ? I saw two or three up-stairs,
and they asked for M'Douall. Who were they ?
James Leach-Mr. MURPHY :-Is that a defendant ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-That is the man who sells
books, &c. Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Who were the others?
Campbell. Who else? I don't know any one
else ? But some others were there? Yes. Do
you remember having been sent for a coach?
Yes, sir. About, what time of day was that?
About three o'clock in the afternoon. Who went
in that coach? Mr. Feargus O'Connor and Dr.
M'Douall.
The JUDGE :-You did not see Mr. O'Connor before that ? No.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Now, when did O'Connor come to the house? I was in the cellar when
he came. But you were afterwards sent for a
coach, and Feargus O'Connor and M'Douall
went into it ? Yes. Did you see where Mr.
O'Connor came from ?-Did he come from upstairs, or where ? He came down stairs.
The JUDGE :-You did not see him come ?
No, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Did you hear either of
them give directions as to Where they were to be
driven ? I did not, sir. Had you seen M'Douall
at your house before that time ? Yes, sir, he had
been in the habit of coming there. Now, did
you see M'Douall or Mr. O'Connor any more
upon that day (Tuesday) ? I did not see Mr.
O'Connor. Did you see M'Douall that day ?
Yes. What time? About six o'clock in the
evening. He came in then? - Yes, sir. Was
there anybody with him ? No, sir. Did he go
out again that evening? No, sir.
The JUDGE :-'He went up-stairs ? No, he

did not go up-stairs when he came in at six
o'clock.
Mr.WORTLEY:-Where did he go? Through
the bar, into what we call the," Snug." Were
there any parties with him? There were some
persons, but I don't know who they were. Do
you know whether he slept in the house or not?
I don't know-No, he did not sleep in the house.
Did you see him again in the morning? Yes.
At what time ? From eight to nine o'clock.
The JUDGE :-On the 17th? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Before you go to Wednesday morning, tell me, if you please, do you know
a man named Turner, a printer? Yes. Did you
see him at your house on Tuesday ? No, sir.
Did you see him at all on the Tuesday? I saw
him on the Tuesday night. Where ? At his
own house. How came you to go there ? I was
To Turner's own
sent there by M'Douall.
house ? Yes. What did he desire you to go
there for? To see if the placards were printed.
Now, what time was that, on Tuesday evening,
that he sent you? It would be a little after six
o'clock. About six o'clock, you say? Yes.
Soon after he came him? Yes. What answer
did you get from Turner ? I was told to say that
the type was not ready. Did M'Douall tell you
what placard it was ? No, sir.
The JUDGE:-The type was not set, you
mean? Yes, my Lord. Did any one come from
Turner's to your house that day- that you saw ?
Parties were sent, but I am not aware that any
one came. What do you mean by saying that
parties were sent ?
Mr. MURPHY :-Don't tell us anything that
you don't know of your own knowledge.
WITNESS:-I am not aware of my own
knowledge, that any one came.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Was M'Douall with anybody when he gave you the message? No.
Where was M'Douall when he ,gave you the
message ?-The JUDGE :-You say Turner was in his
own house? Witness :-Yes. And M'Douall
was in witness's house? Yes, my Lord; he was
in the bat when he sent me to Turner.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Doyouknow Christopher
Doyle ? Yes. When did you see him? On
that Tuesday morning he was in the bar. Where
was M'Douall ? He was in the "Snug," and
Doyle marched through the bar to the "Snug"
where M'Douall was. Do you know Bairstow?
Yes. Did you see him at your house on Tuesday? Yes. At what time ? About dinnertime. At one o'clock? Yes. Was M'Douall
in your housewhen he came? Yes, sir. Where
was he ? In the bar. He came backward and,
forward, and Bairstow went into the "Snug."

1 8
•

Mr. MURPHY :--To the Snug!-They had or drink there? Yes, I suppose your's is a
house of good resort ? Yes.
itsnug there.
The JUDGE :-A general public-house? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Did you see Turner, or
Mr. MURPHY:-Is it in a well-frequented
any of the printers there, on Wednesday? Yes,
sir. At what time on Wednesday ?- Turner part of Manchester ? It is rather backward.
You mean by that, I presume, that it is not in
came about dinner-time.
The JUDGE :--About one o'clock, my lad ? any of the main streets, such as Deansgate, or
Witness :-About twelve or one o'clock, my any of those streets one is familiar with as great
thoroughfares ?-Is it not close to a large market?
Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Was M'Douall in the It is. Then, I presume, a great many parties
house then ? No, sir. Why did Turner ask for come in there for breakfast or dinner ? We supDr. M'Douall ?-You told me M'Douall was not ply no provisions.
in, did you ? Yes, sir. Did he stay or go away ? The JUDGE:-You supply no provisions?
He stayed for two or three minutes. Had Turner No, my Lord.
Mr. MURPHY:-The "Snug" is a great place
anything with him.? He had papers under his
arm. Did he come again that day? No, he of resort, then? Yes. For what purpose do
,came only once that I saw. Did you see him you keep that "Snug"? For any one that comes
only once that day? Yes. He went as far as in. It is retired ? Yes, it is retired. And more
the door, and came back for a few minutes, and comfortable than the bar ? [No answer.]
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now,
after that he was taken up. And after that you
saw him no more ?,No. By taking up you don't Noblett, is not your house close to a large market?
mean taking up-stairs, but arrested ? Yes, sir, Yes. Is it not close to Oldham-street, one of the
arrested. You know a man of tht name of greatest thoroughfares if Manchester ? There is
Wheeler ? Yes. What is he? A printer. He no business in it. Is it not in point of fact, in
styles himself a printer. What else does he do ? that neighbourhood ?He carries an advertiser.
The JUDGE :-Do you mean that there is no
Mr. DUNDAS :-What they call a moving business in Oldham-street, or no business in
your house ? There is no business doing in Oldlegion.
Mr. WORTLEY :-An advertiser that goes ham-street.
about the streets ? Witness :--Yes. When did
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Is it not the most busihe come to your house ? On the Tuesday night. ness street in Manchester ?-Are there not more
Was M'Douall in the house at the time ? No, people passing through it than through any part
sir, he was not. Who did he (Wheeler) ask for? of Manchester? Oldham-streetis a great thoroughI am not aware that he asked for any one. Did fare, but there is not much business doing in
you see him have anything in his hand? He had it. Precisely so. It is a great thoroughfare ?
Yes. You where in the cellar when I was passing
a placard in his hand.
The JUDGE :-What time did he come ? inside, you say? Yes. How long were you there ?
About nine or ten o'clock at night. On the lth ? I kas there a quarter of an hour. ,And I had
not come before you went into the cellar ? No,
On the Tuesday. The 16th? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Just look at that, [hand- sir.
ing witness the "Executive Placard"] and tell
The JUDGE :-That is on the 16th.
me --Mr.O'CONNOR :-On the 16th, my Lord.Mr. MURPHY:-My Lord, I don't know Now, sik, was not your house open that day to
ho* this can be put in at the present time. None any custoner that came-no matter who it was?
of the parties are present, nor are they shown in Yes. There was no precaution taken to prevent
connexion with it. Why then should we be pre- any one from coming id? No. Now, did not
judiced by it ? He is not shown to be a person scores of people come in, strangers and all, and
at all mixed up in this alleged conspiracy. In go up-stairs, without asking for M'Douall, or
point of fact we never heard of him till now, for any one else? Strangers came in. And many
the first time; and, when he does come, he does went up-stai s without asking for M'Douall or
not even ask for Dr. M'Douall. I do not see, any one else ? Scores of people, my Lord.
my Lord, why this should be out in
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Hedid not
Mr. WORTLEY : -- (To Witness) - Was say that. Witness :-No, I did not say that.
M'Douall at all there while Wheeler was there,
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Did not many people
or Campbell, Doyle, or Leach ? No, sir.
come in, and gobackward and fqrward, up-stairs,
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY:-Now, and every where? Yes. I was not more than
sir, have spoken of M'Douall being there: twenty minutes in the house altogether? From
you
Yes. Is not your house a house of entertain- twenty minutes to half an hour. You went for a
ment for any person that wishes to get provisions carriage to take him away? Yes,. Wa at thvre

119
a number of persons collected round the house
to take me away ? Yes. INow, sir, on your oath,
did not I tell the people to go away and disperse,
at once, in consequence of the state of Manchester? I don't, know; I was in the cellar then.
Are you not aware that a vast crowd was outside,
and that I went through your back premises anil
got away from the crowd ? Yes. While I was
up-stairs, after you came out of the cellat, did not
people fro n that crowd rush up-stairs to see me ?
-Did not they rush indiscrinrinately out of the
crowd for that purpose? That I cannot say.
Was there a great rush up-stairs after you returned
from the cellar ? There was before. Was the
staircase crammed up? I never saw it. Was
there any precaution given to you as to who you
should let in ? No. And I was therk from
twenty minutes to half an hour? Yes. Now
was it, or was it not four o'clock, or afterwards ?
I cannot say as to the time.--It was about four
o'clock? I should say three, or afterwards.
Three or afterwards.-And I was not there more
than twenty minutes?
CHRISTOPHER DOYLE:-I wish'toask
CHRISTOPHER DOYLE:-I wish toask
hi few Uesi

o is that ?-Mr. O'Connor:

The JUDGE :-Who is that ?-Mr. :O'Connor:

-Christopher Doyle.
The JUDGE :-I thought Doyle had counsel.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-No, my.lord.
Cross-examined by CHRISTOPHER DOYLE:
-You say your house is situated backward-retired? Yes. Is it not in Oldham-street ? One
part of it (the front) is in Oldham-street, but it
does not belong to us. Does not your vault face
Oldham-street ? The vault facing Oldham-street
is not connected with our house. You say you
saw me enter your house on the 16th of August ?
Yes. Now, is it anything remarkable to see me
enter your house ? No. Have not I been often
in your house before to take a social glass with
my friends? Yes. Then there is nothing remarkable in going there that day ? No. Very

is very little custom. A poor street you meak?
Yes, my Lord.
M'CARTNEY :-Is not the magnitude
I
the business done in that street greater thao
in
that done in any other street Manchester.
Market-street excepted-? I am not aware of it.
Don't you think that in the establishment of a
public-house you would prefer Oldbam-street to
any other in town ? I would not, sir. But still
you are content to admit that it is one of the
greatest thoroughfares in Manchester ? Yes.
At all events, it is equal to any other place for
the exposure of goods? Yes. There are shops
of all sorts in it, from one end to the other,. or
nearly, so? Yes.
Cross-examined by JAMES LEACH:-Did
you ever see me in your house? Yes. Often?
Yes. Three or four times a week ? Yes, and
sometimes more. You have often seen me there
since the 16th of August? Yes. My appearance there on the 16th of August would be
nothing remarkable? No. I just sat down in
your "Snug," and went out again ? You went
backward and forward. Now this "Snug," you
speak of, is it not the only place, in your house,
where men who wish to be quiet would go and
sit down ? There is a news-room. That is a
large room with a bagatelle board in it? Yes.
It is a public news-room ? There is very little
news read in it. Sometimes it is filled with a
low description of people ? Yes. The newsroom and the bar too ? Yes. Therefore when
people come to your house, and wish to have
quiet conversation and a social glass, they go to
the "Snug ?" Yes. You have always seen me,
previous to the 16th of August, going into the
" Snug?" Yes. And since the 16th I have
often been there? Yes. You have never seen
me, in your house, in any other than respectable

and quiet company? Never. Generally conversing on subjects conducive to morality and
good behaviour? I don'tknow, for I have not
been much in the room, but you have been always quiet and sociable. What has been the
opinion of your mother and sister, and the company there of my conduct? You were always
quiet and much respected, and esteemed by
them. And considered honourable in my payments? Yes. f used to come backward and
Yes.
forward to the "Snug?"
Re-examined by Mr. WORTLEY :-On the
day in question I understood you, to say, that
Leach went up-stairs? Yes. Is the door of
posed for ? They are exposed for sale, but there your house in Whittle-street ? Yes.
That is a

good, lad.
Cross-examined by the defendant M'CARTNEY :-What do you mean the Court to understand, when you say that, although Oldham-street
is a public thoroughfare, there is no business
doing in it ?
The JUDGE :-No; he says "little business."
M'CARTNEY :-Little business-comparatively little business. Do you mean to say that
it is not one of the most famous streets in Manchester for the sale and exposure of various
articles ? It is for the exposure, but not for thL
sale.
The JUDGE :-What are those articles ex-

120
part of your house that branches into Oldhamstreet ? Yes.
AGNES MARY NOBLETT, examined by Sir
GREGORY LEWIN:-Are you the sister of the
last witness ? [Witness was affected to tears.]
Don't be alarmed; we shall not do anything to
disturb you.
Do you know M'Douall ? Yes,
sir.
Did you see him at your mother's house
on the 16th of August ? I did. What day of
the week was that ?
Monday.
About what
time of the day did he come?
About ten
o'clock in the forenoon. Did he come alone ?
Yes, sir.
I believe he did not stay a great
length of time ? No, sir. Did he come on the
following day? Yes, sir. At what time? Between twelve and one o'clock. Was any one
with him ? He came alone by himself. When
he came, was your mother in? Yes, sir.
Did
he ask her anything ? Yes. What was that?
If he could have a room. What did your mother
say to that ? That the room was unsafe. Do
you know what she meant by that?
Mr.MURPHY :-O dear, we will have a fact!
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-It
might be the
floor that was unsafe.
The JUDGE :-Well, we will have that.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Did she give any
reason why the room was unsafe ? No. What
did he say in reply to that? lie asked if he
might look at it. Was it up-stairs ? Yes. And
when he had looked at it, did he make any remark ? He said it was safe. Did he say what
he wanted it for? He said he wanted it for
about eighteen. Did he go awayor remain ?
The JUDGE :-He said he wanted it for
about eighteen ? Yes, my Lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Did he go away?
Witness :-He remained. Did any others come ?
Yes.
How soon?
Shortly after. Do you
know how many came-about ? I can't tell the
number. Do you know any by name? Yes.
Just mention their names.
Dr. M'Douall,
Campbell, Leach (James)The JUDGE :-The printer and bookseller ?
Yes, my Lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN: - Who else?
M'Cartney and Doyle. Do you know a person
of the name of Bairstow ? Yes, he was up. stairs.
Do you remember the names of any others ? No,
sir.
When did Mr. O'Connor come? In the
afternoon. Was his arrival noticed in any manner ? He was cheered.
The JUDGE :-Cheered by whom? By the
party following him.

Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-What room did
he go to? To the room named. When he had
gone up-stairs, do you remember your mother
doing anything? Yes. What did she do ? She
went up-stairs and said the crowd must disperse.
On her making that wish of hers known, what
followed ? Some went down stairs to the door,
and wished the crowd to go away; and the
crowd went sway. Then what became of the
persons in the room up-stairs ?
They went
away. Who remained up-stairs. Mr. O'Connor
and Dr. M'Douall, and others; but 1 do not recollect their names. Do you remember who
addressed the mob, and told them that they
must go away ? Dr. M'Douall. Now, after the
mob had gone, how long did Mr. O'Connor and
the others remain?
Till the coach came for
them. 'nhere is a person of the name of Baron
lives next door to you ? Yes, in the next house
but one.
The JUDGE:-How do you spell it ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-B-a-r-o-n. Which
way did O'Connor go out ? Through Baron's
door. The back way through your house, and
on to his premises ? Yes, sir.
Now, on the
Wednesday night (the 17th) did any of those
persons come to your house, who had been there
on the 16th? Yes.
Who were they? Dr.
M'Douall and Campbell, Mr. M'Cartney, and
others that I don't remember. Was it in the
evening they came ? Yes. What room did they
occupy? The room called the " Snug." How
long did they remain ? I believe about an hour
to an hour and a half. Did they make any inquiry? They went away a few minutes before
eleven o'clock.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY :-I shall
ask one or two questions. Are you aware that
Mr. O'Connor is a gentleman rather popular
among the people of Manchester ? I heard his
name frequently. Have you not seen crowds of
people following him through the streets ? No.
Well, you would not know it. You heard a
question asked by M'Douall about the room
being unsafe; allow me to ask, did the Doctor
ask "for eighteen" before your mother made
that answer, or was it a spontaneous answer of
her own ? The wall is cracked. Then am I to
understand that that was the cause ? He asked
for a room up-stairs, and she said it was unsafe,
and asked for how many it was, and he said
"eighteen."
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :--How
long was I in your house altogether? I should

121
say not better than half an hour. When I came
in, an immense number of people gathered round
me? Yes. These were the people that were
cheering me. Yes. The people outside ? Yes.
Did you see me coming in ? I saw you in the
room. Were there not people coming in indiscriminately, and filling the room ? They were
not allowed to go into the room. Were you in
the room ? I was about. Did not your mother
come up and request that the people should be
dilpersed ?-Who requested that they should be
dispersed ? My mother. Did not I, immediately, send your brother for a coach, and ask
some one if there was not some way where I
might get out, besides through the front, that I
might go away ? My mother ordered my brother to go and fetch a coach. Were you in the
room while I was there? I was. You were! I
thought you said you were only about.-How
long did you remain in the room while I was
there ? A few minutes. Did your mother come
into the room while I was there? She did.
How long did she remain there? I cannot say.
How long do you think ? I can't say how long.
Did you miss your mother away? A few
minutes. Did she tell you she had been up to
see me ? I knew she was up. While I was
there, you and your mother, some of the family,
and strangers, were coming up. About what
hour did I arrive at your house ? About two
o'clock. Did you hear me telling the people for
God's sake to go away, or I would leave Manchester altogether ? I did not. At what time
on the Wednesday was it you saw M'Cartney,
Doyle, and others, come to your house? Tell
the hour as near as possible? Between nine and
ten o'clock. They remained there, you say,
about an hour and a half? Yes; Campbell went
away, and the others remained there an hour and
a half. How far is it from your house to Everystreet? Don't you know it is a great distance ?
I don't know. I don't want to puzzle you, Miss
Noblett; I want to come at the facts. Do you
know that it is above a mile ?-Is it not a good
way off-in the other part of the town altogether ?
The JUDGE :-Is it a long way off? It is.
Mr. O'CONNOR: - And M'Douall, Leach,
and others were there between 9 and 10 o'clock,
and remained there an hour and a half? Leach
was not.
Cross-examined by JAMES LEACH:-Do

o'clock. What time did I leave your house?
At a quarter to eleven o'clock.
The JUDGE :-Does any other defendant
wish to ask a question ?
JAMES CARTLEDGE, examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Where do you live now,
sir ? At Manchester. Now, Cartledge, speak
as loud as you can that the people over there
[pointing to the Jury box] may hear you. How
long have you lived at Manchester ? About 20
years. And what has been your business? I
have worked in a factory part of the time, and
I have been a §choolmaster. Now, in the beginning of the month of August, in last year,
were you yourself a member of the Chartist
body ? Yes, sir. Were there any persons who
called themselves the "Executive Committee" ?
Yes, sir. Who were they? James Leach, of
Manchester, John Bairstow, John Campbell,
Peter Murray M'Douall, and Morgan Williams.
Mr. MURPHY :-" Morgan Ratler."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-On Sunday,
the 7th of August, did you attend a meeting at
Oldham ? Yes, sir. Was that what is called a
Chartist meeting, or what was it? Yes, sir,
a Chartist meeting. Was it held in the open
air or in a room-what sort of a meeting do you
call that ?-Does it go by any name? By no
name; it was a regular Chartist-lecture meeting.
Well, were you the lecturer at that time ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-At this stage of the proceedings I wish to remind your Lordship, that
this man is in the indictment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Is that true,
my Lord? I thought there was a nolle prosequi
entered.
The PROTHONOTARY :-No.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Well, it was
ordered. I am much obliged to Mr. O'Connor
for reminding me of it. I certainly, my Lord,
had given directions for a nolle prosequi to be
entered.
Mr. MURPHY :-Cartledge is in the indict
ment.
Mr. PART examined the indictment, and said
the nolle prosequi had not been entered.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, having entered
the nolle prosequi, said:-As my hand is in-Iwill
now do the same for Win. Scholefield, John
Wilde, and Thomas Pitt.It is done.
Mr. DUNDAS:-My Lord, I am not quite
aware of the practicein this matter, but I think

you remember Saturday, the 13th of August ? the evidence of this witness is inadmissible. I
Yes. Who was in your " Snug" on that day ? remember a case of this kind which occurred be.
You were. At what time ? Between 8 and 9 fore Mr. Baron Bolland, and which was after-

122
wards considered by thq Judges in London; all, including Perceval. Application having been
where a question arose, whether a person, against made to Baron Bolland to admit him as a witness,
whom a bill had been found, could be received and he objected to alter the bill. He said it must
as a witness against others accused of the same stand as delivered to the Grand Jury, and the
offence. He was in the bill sent before the witness was held incompetent.
The JUDGE:-That is entirely a different
Grand Jury, and the bill Wuradthing. found he
Grn having been
The bill there was found on the evidence
was deemed an incompetent witness.
of that person alone against himself.
The JUDGE :-That might have been a quesMr. DUNDAS :-But here is a case of a bill
tion, but this is a different one. A nolle prosequi being found against a person, and nothing is done
having been entered here, the question is, does before the trial to render him competent as a
witness.
not the witness become competent ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I mention this objection
The JUDGI :-I think there is no analogy
now in order that, if anything should arise out of whatever in this case, and that of the King
it afterwards, the defendants may not lose the against Perceval. In the latter, the question was
advantage of it.
whether the bill was a good one, but here there
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, there is no dispute of the kind. Suppose A. and
nothingis more common, if the Attorney-General B. are indicted, and a bill is found against both,
be absent, than to take an acquittal.
I don't see why B. might not afterwards be a
The JUDGE :--Anolle prosequi is as good to witness.
the party as an acquittal.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I believe,
Mr. DUNDAS :-But, my Lord, you will not my Lord, in point of law, (although it is usual
allow him to be acquitted till the end.
to gain an acquittal, or enter, a nolle prosequi
The JUDGE :-I will do so now.
.
before trial, for the purpose of preventing even
Mr. DUNDAS :-But my learned friend has the supposition that the witness labours under
taken a step in advance,
any infirmity arising from a motive of that sort,)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :--Nothing he is perfectly competent as a witness.
is more common than to apply to the AttorneyThe JUDGE :-I think the point is quite
General, at the sitting of the court, for a nolle clear when the nolle prosequi is entered. I shall
prosequi, where one of the defendants is a neces- now read over the evidence which he has already
sary witness.
i given, and ask him to swear to it again.
.The JUDGE:--There is no doubt about it.
Mr. MURPHY applied for and was handed
.The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- As an the indictment, in order that he might look at
objection has been taken, perhaps we may as well the names of those on whose behalf a nolle probe regular. Perhaps you will allow the witness sequi had been entered.
to be sworn.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL resumed the
The JUDGE :-Certainly.
examination :-Were any of the defendants preJAMES CARTLEDGE was again sworn.
sent at that meeting? No, sir. Where did you
The JUDGE:-I have taken a note of the go to on the following day ?-On Monday, the
objection of the defendants to have the witness 8th of August? To Eccles, near Manchester.
examined, on the ground that'he is in,the indict- Do you know Morrison? Yes. Was he there?
ment-that the Attorney-General entered a nolle Yes. What is his Christian name? David, I
prosequiwith his own hand to discharge him from believe.
the indictment, the defendants still objecting.
The JUDGE :-Is he a defendant?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I may just observe, that in
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Yes,my Lord.
the case of the King against Perceval, Lewis's Was that meeting in the room, or in the open
CrAimn. vol. 1, page 151.-The Judge, Mr. air? In a room. Did you there learn about the
Cases,
Baron Bolland, in a similar case, sent back the strike of the workmen? I heard it named.
bill to the Grand Jury to amend it.
Where did you go to from Eccles? To ManSir GREGORY LEWIN:-In that case the chester. You came back to Manchester. Were
Grand Jury intimated that their intention was to
you at Manchester when the mob entered, on
throw out the bill as against that individual,
Tuesday the 9th ? Now, I ask you nothing about
Mr. DUNDAS :-In the case of the King the proceedings in Manchester on Tuesday and
and Perceval, application had been made for Wednes
Perceval to go before the Grand Jury as a witness Wednesday, but on Thursday mbrning. Did you
against his confederates, but, by an inadvertence, attend any meeting in or near Manchester on
At what o'clock?
his name was inserted previ6usly, and was not Thursday the 11th? Yes.
erased from the bill before it was sent before the Six in the morning. Where was that? In a
I believe the
Grand Jury. They returned a true bill against place called Granby-tow-fields.

L23
magistrates interfered, and dispersed the meeting ? Yes. Now, I believe you went from there
to some other part of Manchester? I went to
Carpenters' Hall. Were any of the defendants
at that meeting? Brophy. What is his Christian name ? I cannot say. His signatures are,
generally, P. M. Brophy., Was he the only one
of the defendants that you know to have been
there ? I don't remember any other. At that
meeting, was any resolution come to in connection with the state of the disturbances that existed at that time? A resolution was passed
for the five iron trades of Manchester to cease
work till the Charter had become the law of the
land. What do you medn by the five iron
trades? Five different branches of the iron
trade;--Moulders, Smiths, Filers, Turners, and
another, which I don't remember. On Sunday,
the 14th, did you attend a meeting at Mottram
Moor_? Yes. Was that in the open air? Yes.
How many persons attended ? Several hundreds. On Tuesday, the 16th, were you in the
shop of Heywood, a printer ? Yes.
Mr. MURPHY :-What is that?
Mr. BAINES :-On Tuesday, the 16th, he was
in the shop of Heywood, a printer.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Where was
that? Witness:-In Oldham-street. How far
is that from Noblett's ? Not far. Did Heywood
put aiything into your hands ? A roll of paper,
accompanied by a note ?
The JUDGE :-Is Heywood a defendant? No,
my Lord ? Did he desire you to take it to any
one ? To Dr. M'Douall.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-That is, Peter
Murray M'Douall? Yes, Sir. Did he tell you
where he (M'Douall) was? He said I should
find him at James Leach's. Did you go to
Leach's ? Yes. Who did you see there? The
shop was full at the time. I sent for M'Douall,
and he came down stairs to see me. Where did
he come from ? From up-stairs. What passed
between you. and M'Douall? I gave him the
roll of Piaper and the note, and told him the note
would explain to him what it was. Did he remain with you, or go away? He went up-stairs.
And how long did he stay? A few minutes.
He came down again. What did he do, or say?
He brought down the same roll of paper, and
presented it to me; and told me to get it printed
at all hazards. Did he say anything else-who
it was for, or anything of that sort ? No, he did
not say for whom it was. Now, did you open
the paper? Yes. Did you know what after-

wards became of that paper-whether it is in
existence or not ? I believe it to be burned.
Why? Because P. M. M'Douall told me so on
the night of the 17th.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I have looked for a moment
more at the point which I submitted to your
Lordship, and I submit still, that the witness is
not a good witness, by reason of his having been
put upon his trial with the other defendants
before the slightest intimation was given from the
Attorney-General of his intention to enter a nolle
prosequi. In the 2nd " Russell on Crimes," p.
597, it is laid down that not only if two or more
persons are accomplices, may one who is not
indicted be a witness against the others; but he
may also be so, it seems, when he is indicted
jointly with his partners in guilt, although it is
not usual or proper to include them in the indictment, provided he has not been put upon his
trial at the same time with the others. And
there is quoted for authority the case of the
" King v. Rowland and others," before the Lord
Chief Jistice Abbott, on an 'indictment for conspiracy, on which theLord Chief Justice held, that
the counsel for the prosecution had a right, before
opening his case, to call for the acquittal of any of
the defendants he intended calling as a witness,
if he had not previouslyentered a nolle prosequi.
Here we have quite a different state of things.
The Attorney-General did notlenter a nolle prosequi till after the defendant was put upon his
trial with others, and the rule of law is, that, if he
stand indicted with others as defendant, and put
upon his trial with others, he cannot be called as
a witness.

I call your Lordship's serious atten-

tion to the case which has been decided. I am
quite sure your Lordship was not till this moment
aware that this defendant was intended to be
placed in a different situation from any other defendants. It appears to me this is decisive of
the point. I submit to your Lordship that he is
incompetent.
Mr. WORTLEY :-In " Phillips on Evidence," p. 57, it is laid down that on a prosecution by the Crown, a nolle prosequi be entered
by the Attorney-General, either before or at the
trial, in order that the particular defendant may
be called as a witness.
1Vr. DUNDAS :-It does not appear there
that the defendants were put on trial.
Sir GREGORY I2EWIN:-In 2nd Starkie
it is laid down that an accomplice is a competent
witness, provided he is not put upon his trial
with the others. I have frequently, my Lord,
seen it in practice at York, that, where persons
were indicted together, applications have been
miade that they might be tried separately, in
qrder that one might be awitness against another.

124

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I
would
beg, my Lord, to read from "Roscoe's Criminal
Evidence," p. 141, the following passage :-"The
evidence of persons who have been accomplices in
the commission of a crime with which the prisoner
stands charged is in general admissible against
him. This rule has been stated to be founded
on necessity, since, if accomplices were not admitted it would frequently be impossible to find
evidence to convict the greatest offenders. Even
where the accomplice has been joined in the same
indictment with the prisoner he may still be called
as a witness before he is convicted. It is said that
an accomplice indicted with another, is an admissible evidence, if he be not put upon his trial."
This is in Italics, my Lord. " In strictness,
however, there does not seem to be any objection
to the admitting the witness at any time before
conviction. "The party that is the witness," says
Lord Hale, "is never indicted because that
much weakens and disparages his testimony, but
possibly does not wholly take away his testimony.
it is not a matter of course to admit an accomplice to give evidence on the trial, even though
his testimony has been received by the comnitting magistrates, but on application to the Court

where the testimony of an accomplice is required,
is to prove the case before the Grand Jury, and
the counsel for the prosecution is to move, that
he be allowed to go before the Grand Jury, pledging his own opinion, after a perusal of the facts of
the case, that his testimony is essential.-Where
the accomplice has been joined in the indictment,
and before the case comes on, it appears that his:
evidence will be required; the usual practice is,
before opening the case, to apply to have the
accomplice acquitted, where the case has proceeded against all the prisoners; but if no evidence appears against one of them, the Court.
will, in its discretion, upon the application of
the prosecutor, order that one to be acquitted
for the purpose of giving evidence against the rest.
But the Judges will not, in general, admit an
accomplice, although applied to for that purpose
by the counsel for the prosecution, if it appears
that he is charged with any other felony than that
on the trial of which he is to be a witness. Where
the defendants were indicted for a conspiracy to
persuade a witness to absent himself from the
trial of a person charged with uttering base
money, the Attorney-General entered a nolle
prosequi as to two of the defendants, "who were
then exaimined for the Crown, and on their
evidence the others were convicted." It therefore appears to me, my Lord, it is quite competent
for me to ask your Lordship to direct the Jury
to acquit the witness, or I may, on behalf of the
Crown, exercise the power of entering a nolle
prosequ.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-This does not at all effect
the point raised, namely, that the record has
been removed by certiorari.
Mr. ATHERTON - The view which Mr.
O'Connor has taken, my Lord, appears to me to
be the correct one; and I beg again to submit
the objection raised by him, to the consideration
of your Lordship. ' Assuming this to be an ordinary case of indictment, and not one removed
by certiorari, still a nolle prosequi could not be
entered on this record, for this record is not the
real indictment; this record is not the information returned by the Grand Jury, but a transcript
sent down by mittimus,, as appears on the face
of the record itself. The entry ofa nolleprosequi
is taking the judgment of the Court with respect
to a particular defendant-let no further proceedings be taken. Your Lordship is sitting now
a judge of nisi prius, and this is a civil actiona nisi prius record.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL -- I beg to say
that I have frequently, as Attorney-Generalr
signed a parchment for a nolle prosequi, buts

for the purpose, he may be admitted; the practice,

Sntil this occasion, I never entered it on the ih.

And I remember Mr. Justice Holroyd, where
two persons were indicted together, allowdd after
the conviction and before judgment, one to be
examined as a witness in favour of the other.
Mr. MURPHY :-That is the difficulty in our
case, precisely, and if his Lordship gets it in his
notes it will be enough.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
I am much obliged to my learned friends on the
other side for guarding the prosecution against
the trouble of a new trial, to which, no doubt the
defendants would be entitled if this man is not
a competent witness. But I consider that the
ends of public justice require that I should examine him. I may, however, insist on examining
him, for, I believe, in point of law, I ai entitled
to do so.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, Ihaveanother
objection to take. It is necessary that the Attorney-General should enter the nolle prosequi
on the record. Now, this record having been
removed by certiorarito the Court of Queen's
Bench, it is necessary that the Attorney-General
should have the record here in order to enter the
nolle prosequi.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--The record
came here by mittimus, and must, necessarily, be
before your Lordship.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Of course it is for all
available purposes, but the question is,-can the
Attorney-General alter the record, and on so
vjtal a point ?

125
dictment itself, but always on a little paper
handed to the officer of the court.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-It must be a part of the
record, and the entry of it now alters the record.
The JUDGE :-I will now state my opinion.
In the first place, I conceive that the AttorneyGeneral may, in omne tempori, et in omne loco,
enter a nolle prosequi. There can be no prose.
cution going on against any person, at the suit of
the Crown, in which it is not the privilege of the
Attorney-General, at any time, to enter a nolle
prosequi. I confess I have a strong feeling, that
in an indictment for misdemeanor, at all events,
the mere circumstance of his being a defendant
would not incapacitate a person from being a
witiless; but, I think the Attorney-General can
at any time, before the verdict is given, enter a
nolle prosequi for him, and thus put him in the
same situation as if he never were a defendant.
However, as it has been objected that this record
has been removed by certiorari to the Court of
Queen's Bench, I would suggest, as the most
convenient thing (the Attorney-General may take
his own course), instead of entering a nolleprosequi, to take an acquittal. And it may be essential' to the interests of the other defendants to
have the party acquitted. There can be no
possible law that a man can Pe a more competent
witness for one side than the other.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I have no desire to struggle for any point of law. I submit,
my Lord.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I submit, my Lord, that you
will not permit the Attorney-General to take an
acquittal at this period.
The JUDGE :-We cannot do it again. I
shall take it now as a tabula rasa-asif nothing
had been said.
Mr. DUNDAS :-In the ordinary state of
things I believe it is the rule, that the co-conspirator is not acquitted till the end of the case.
The JUDGE :-I do not see how any conspirator can object to his co-conspirator being
acquitted.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I submit to your Lordship
that no co-conspirator can be acquitted.
The JUDGE :-I submit that no co-defendant
can be heard.
Mr. O'CONNOR: - Suppose the AttorneyGeneral offers no evidence against Cartledge ?
The JUDGE :-If the Attorney-General offers
no evidence against him, I think it very hard if
we do not take an acquittal. We will take the

Mr. O'CONNOR :-The grounds on which the
Attorney-General allowed Wilde to be acquitted
was this; that nothing was found against him.
Now, my Lord, other witnesses do, in their depositions, charge Cartledge.
The JUDGE :-The Attorney-General is not
going to offer any evidence against Cartledge,
Wilde, Scholefield, jun., or Pitt, and he wishes
them to be acquitted, There are four of them
against whom he offers no evidence.
The JURY then, by the directions of the Court,
acquitted James Cartledge, William Scholefield,
John Wilde, and'Thomas Pitt.
CARTLEDGE was then re-sworn.
The JUDGE :-What you have stated before,
is it correct ? I need not read it over to you
again. Yes, my Lord, it is.
The JUDGE :-As this may be important, I
shall let the parties know the note I have taken:
" The objection was renewed, and it was
suggested further, that as the Attorney-General
had not entered a nolle prosequi before the defendants were put upon their trial, the witness
I considered the objection
was incompetent.
unfounded, and to prevent any further difficulty,
I directed an acquittal against Cartledge, Wilde,
Pitt, and Scholefield, and allowed the compe[His
tency of Cartledge to give evidence'."
Lordship then read over the notes he had
taken of Cartledge's evidence, up to the time the
objection was made, and Cartledge again alleged
that they were true.]
did
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : -Where
In Turner's, the printer's.
you see it last?
In whose handwriting, was it? In P. M.
M'Douall's. You say you took it to Turner's,
the printer's ? Yes. How soon ? Immediately.
The JUDGE :-This was on the 16th? Yes.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : - What time
did you take it to Turner's, the printer's. As
near ten o'clock as I can remember, on the
morning of the 16th. Did any person go with
you ? Yes. Who ? Edward Clarke and a person named Johnson. Did you put it into Turner's hands? Yes. Did you tell Turner who it
For the "Executive
was to be printed for?
Committee." Did you refer Turner to any one ?
To Mr. Leach. You say Clarke and Johnson
were with you ? Yes. Were they Chartists ?
Yes. How many of the placards did you order ?
Three hundred.
The JUDGE :-To be printed from that papet ? Yes, my Lord.,
Where did
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
others in the same way :-Wilde and Scholefield.

126
you after go to yourself? I returned to
Leach's. While you were there, did any person
come from Turner's about the printing of these
placards? One of Turner's apprentices came to
ask him as to some words that he could not
read. Did any one explain them to him?
M'Douall came down and explained them to him.
The JUDGE :-This was on the 16th? Yes,
my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Did M'Douall
give the boy any directions ? He told him to
take it and make the best of it he could, and
bring it to him for correction. Now, while you
were there, before you went away, did any person come down-stairs from the room above?
John Campbell and Bairstow came down
from the room where M'Douall was. Before
Campbell went away, did he make any communication to you about a person named Cooper ?
Yes. What did he say ? He.stated that Cooper
had arrived from the Potteries, and that the people there were burning all before them. Did he
say what it was about? That they were all determined to strike for the Charter. Did you
again go to Turner's on the subject of the printing of that roll ? Yes. Well, did you get it
that day ? I did not get any myself that day.
Did you know anything about a proof-sheet being sent ? Mr. Turner told me. Don't tell us
what Turner told you, but just look at it, and
tell me whether you can't speak to M'Douall's
handwriting? [The proof-sheet of the "Executive Placard " was then handed to witness, and
having examined the marginal corrections, he
said, "This is M'Douall's handwriting."] You
are acquainted with his handwriting ? I am,
sir. The following morning did you go to
Leach's shop? I did. That was Wednesday
the 17th ? Yes. Did you see any of the defendants there ? Yes. Do you remember who were
there ? Yes; Julian Harney, of Sheffield, Mr.
Parkes, Rev. Win. Hill, Bairstow, and Leach.
Did you mention Bairstow? Yes.
Which
Leach was that? James Leach, of Manchester.
Did any body send you anywhere? The Rev.
Wm. Hill sent me to procure a placard. What
placard was that ? One that had been issued by
the trades of Manchester. Should you know
the placard if you were to see it [handing the
" Liberty Placard" to witness] ? I believe this
to be the same; I got one similar to this, and
I gave it to Hill. Did you learn from any body
the time or place when any conference was to be
held ? Bairstow told'me it was to be held im-

What
mediately. What ? The conference.
conference? One that had been called by the
" Executive Committee." Where was it to be
holden? At Mr. Scholefield's chapel. Upon
that, did you go anywhere, with whom did you
go, and where did you go to? I went with
Bairstow to Mr. Scholefield's chapel ? Now, on
the way, had you any conversation with Bairstow, about any placard? Yes; he stated that, if
the Government did not arrest the "Executive
Committee" within forty-eight hours, they dare
not do it, on account of the agitation of the
country. Now, what placard was he speaking
of ? The one called the "Executive Placard"-address of the Executive Committee.
The JUDGE :-I heard nothing of a placard.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-His answer
did not mention it, but my question was thisHad you any conversation about a placard as you
were walking along, and he did not answer, but
said, he (that is, Bairstow) stated, that, if the
Government did not arrest the ixecutive Committee within forty-eight hours, they dare not do
it, on account of the agitation of the country.
Now, had you any conversation about a placard ?
Yes; he stated that the placard was a spirited
one; that Mr. O'Connor, and some others, objected to the wording of it; and then he added,
that, if the Government did not arrest the Execu
tive Committee within forty-eight hours, they
dare not do it. Did he say when it was that the
objection was made by Mr. O'Connor? tunderstood him to say that it was on the previous evening. Now, to complete-from what passed on
that occasion, have you any doubt that it was the
" Executive Placard ?"
Mr. DUNDAS:-That is as strong a question
as ever I heard. It is a driving question.
Mr. MURPHY :-That is a nolleprosequi!
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Well, what
placard was it? Witness :-The "Executive
Placard."
The JUDGE :-How do you know? Witness :-Because we were talking about it, and I
was at the printer's with it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-You have
been at Turner's with it. Well, you got at last
to Scholefield's, and how did you get in there?
The JUDGE :-You and Bairstow? Witness:
-Yes, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--How did
you get in ?-Did they let in anybody ?-Was
there anything required? I did not see anything
required. Was there anything to identify you?
When we got into the chapel, near the pulpit, the
secretary was appointed to receive the credentials
of those who came as members of the confer-

127
ence. Were you there early-before the business
began, or after the business commenced? After.
The business had commenced, I believe, when
you went in. About how many persons were
there ? Near 30 at the time I entered. Did any
others come in afterwards ? Yes. Well, now,
will you tell us who were there ?-Who do you
recollect? A gentleman of the name of Arthur
was in the chair What is his Christian name?
I don't know. Did you learn from him, or from
anything that occurred in his presence, where he
came from ? He came from Carlisle.
The JUDGE :-He said so, did he?
also,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL -,Who,
were present ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Mr. Hill, Mr. Beesley,
Mr. Harney, Mr. Parkes, Mr. Otley, James
Leach, of Manchester, John Leach, of Hyde,
Thomas Railton, David Morris, Arran, of
Bradford, Thomas Cooper, from Leicester,
Fletcher-The JUDGE :-These are all defendants?
'The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:-

Except

Bradford.
WITNESS:-And a young man of the name
.
of Ramsden, and-Hoyle.
The

ATTORNEY - GENERAL: - Was

M'Douall there? Yes;-John Campbell, Bernard
M'Cartney, Norman. Was Skevington there?
Yes. Was anybody of the name of Brooks
there ? Yes; he came from Todmorden, I believe.
Do you know his Christian name? I don't.. Is it
Brook or Brooks ? Brooks.
The JUDGE :-Brooks-with an a? Yes, I
believe.
you
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: -Do
kniow Mooney? Yes. Where does he come from,
do you know? He comes from Colne. I believe
there was some accomodation wanted? Yes, sir,
a table was wanted for the use of the chairman.
Did you get it? I was solicited to go to Mr.
Scholefield, to ask the loan of one. Did you
apply to him for it? I did so. Is there any communication between the chapel and his house?
Yes, sir, I went through the yard to the surgery
door. Is Scholefield also a surgeon ? An apothecary. You went to the surgery door.-Well,
did you get the table? Mr. Scholefield promised
to take one t6 the chapel. Did he give you any
message to the delegates? Yes, sir. What? He
requested me to tell them not to come so publicly.
Did he mention any reason for that ? He said
certain persons had watched Mr. Harney and
Mr. Parkes, and were then watching the
door. Did the delegates all come in at one
entrance. I cannot speak to that. Did Scholefield say anything more ? Yes, he requested me
to send two men away who were sitting on
the steps opposite his gates. Did you do so ?

I did. Did the men go away ? They did.
Do you know a person of the name of Griffin ?
I do. Did he come to the meeting? He did.
Upon his coming in was anything said by anybody? Remarks were made by several delegates,
and amongst the rest M'Douall stated, that if
the speeches, which there passed, were to be pub.
lished, he for one should be silent. Was Griffin
one of the delegates or a Chartist ? I put the
question myself, through the chairman, in what
capacity he (Griffin) had come there, and the
answer was, that he came there as a reporter;
then M'Douall said, if the speeches were to be
published, he for one would be silent. Had he
(Griffin) a note book ? He had. Did any one
say anything in favour of his remaining there and
taking notes? Yes, sir, Mr. O'Connor. Well,
did he remain there? He did. For the whole
time ? To the best of my knowledge, he was
there for the whole time. And did he take notes
I saw him writing. Then was there any speaking ? Yes. What did the delegates do then ?
A resolution was moved, that the speeches should
not be published-nothing but the resolutions.
Was there any resolution proposed? Yes, sir.
By whom? By Mr. Bairstow. What was the
effect of that resolution ? The purport of it was,
to continue the present " strike." Was the ob.
ject of their doing that mentioned ?-Tell us
what the resolution was about ?-Was there anything more in the resolution ?-Was it a resolu.
tion or a speech ? No, a resolution; and, as
far as I remember, it went to lay the blame
on the Anti-corn-law League, Bairstow stated.
Do you remember anything that Bairstow
said, when he proposed the resolution? He
stated, that the favourable impression made on
his mind, by the reports given by the various
delegates, caused him to propose that resolution to the meeting; and that it was the
duty of, every Chartist to throw his influence
into the scale. Who seconded the resolution ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Do you remember anything he said ? He stated that it was the duty
of the Chartists to take advantage of passing
events. Not that he anticipated so much from
the present strike, but after we had expended
so much money and time in inducing the trades
to join us, we could never get them to join again
unless we passed some such resolution. Do you
remember if Cooper spoke? He supported the
resolution. What did he' say ? He stated that
the Shakespearian Chartists of Leicester were
determined to have the Charter. What do you

128
mean by the Shakespearian Chartists ? I understood it to be a body of Chartists in Leicester,
of which he is the General; he calls them the
Shakespearian Brigade. Did he say anything
more ? He said he had been at various places,
and enumerated Bilston and the Potteries. The
people of that district were determined to have
the Charter, and for his part, he was prepared
to fight for the liberties of the people. Did
they all speak ? Most of them. Some, I suppose,
opposed the resolution? Yes, sir, Mr. Hill opposed it.-Harney opposed it. Was there any
amendment moved ? Mr. Hill moved an amend-

nent.
The JUDGE :-You are speaking of the resolution that they might continue the present
strike ? Yes, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Did you see
an account in the Northern Star of the 20th of
August ?-Did you read an account which was
there given of the meeting of delegates ?-And
as far as it goes is that correct ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I object to that, my Lord;
he may ask the witness question by question if
he likes.
SThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-At all events,
as against Mr. O'Connor, having read his newspaper, I have a right to ask whether that is
correct.
The JUDGE :-As against Mr. O'Connor it
should be rather, that he made such a statement.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL ;-[To Witness]
--Well, is that statement true? Yes.
The JUDGE :-I think that is evidence more
against Mr. O'Connor than anybody else.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
am most anxious to avoid every possible objection.- [To Witness]-Do you rememberawhat
Hill said when he moved the amendment? He
summed up the speech of every man, and went
on to show, or did rather, that the report given
in by the delegates did not justify the passing of
such a resolution. Do you recollect anything
said by M'Douall? M'Douall supported the
original resolution, and said, that after the
spirited placard that had been sent out by the
Executive Committee, he could do no less than
support the original resolution; more especially,
on account of the good sense displayed by some
of the trades, in taking their money out of the
Savings' Banks. He referred to a placard that
had been posted on the walls of the town of
Manchester, "Run for gold;" and said that we

inside did not know what was passing outside
that orders had come down from Sir James
Graham to the mill-owners, to get their workpeople in at any price. He believed, that something was "up" on the Continent, and that, by
taking advantage of it, the Charter would soon
become the law of the land. Was Scholefield in
during any part of these transactions ? I saw
him in the chapel several times. Do you remember at last, his making some communication
to the chairman ? I saw him communicate something to the chairman, who then declared that
Turner, the printer, had been arrested. That
was Turner who printed the Executive Address ?
Yes. And hearing that, did O'Connor make
any other remark? Yes, he stated,The JUDGE :-After the chairman said Turner was arrested? Yes. And what did Mr.
O'Connor say ? He stated that that justified
the remark that he made last night, and added
something to the purpose, that it was better to
avoid such things when they could.
The

ATTORNEY - GENERAL :

Did

M'Douall say anything to that. Yes, he rose, and
said it was true that Turner was arrested, but not
for printing the placard,-it was for refusing a
copy of it to the authorities. About what time
did the meeting break up. We adjourned in the
afternoon, near four o'clock. Now, this was the
17th. When was it that M'Douall told you
about burning the manuscript ? About seven
o'clock in the evening. Now, I want to know
when was it, and where was it, that M'Douall
told you about the manuscript ? It was in the
evening. Was any body with you ? John Campbell, James Leach, Bairstow, and Doyle. Was
Doyle at the meeting of delegates ? Yes. How
came M'Douall to tell you anything about it?
We retired from the meeting to consult about
our own safety.
The JUDGE;-Those that you mention,Campbell, Leach, Doyle, Bairstow, M'Douall,
and yourself ? Yes, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-You say
that you retired to consult about your own
safety. Yes, as we heard that the officers had
been at Mr. Leach's house. Where was it you
met, or where had you been together? We
retired to the Bull's Head, Holt-town, at the
Reservoir banks. Did the'conference ever meet
again to your knowledge ? Not after that, but
we met after the adjournment. This meeting
was after the breaking up of the conference altogether. Did you attend any meeting of the
conference after the 17th ? None. When did
they break up and disperse ? On the evening of
the 17th. After passing the resolution ? Yes,

129
and an address. I want to ask you, sir, was
there any division about the amendment and the
resolution ?-I think you say Hill proposed an
amendment,-was there any divison ? There was.
Do you remember the numbers, or about the
numbers, one way or the other? To the best of
my recollection their would be six or seven supporting the amendment. And how many were
supporting the original resolution. Perhaps thirty.
Now, after the resolution had been carried by a
majority, was there any other resolution proposed ? I understood that the minority was to go
with the majority. You understood, you say,
that the minority was to go with the majority,
but was there any resolution put to that effect?
That I can't say. Did you see Cooper that night
at all? Yes. Where? At my house. Did he
say anything to you on the subject of that meeting ? On our way to Oldham, we held a conversation about it. Well, what did he say ? My
Lord, I don't think it is worth while asking
conversations. You said there was a resolution
and an amendment, but you also said there was
an address; was there any division about the
address; or was it carried unanimously? I
believe the address was carried unanimously.
Very good.
Cross-examined by Mr. BAINES:-Did you.
vote on this question about the amendment ? I
voted against the amendment. With the majority ? Yes. Did you understand then that it
was their intention to do anything illegal? It
was not my intention to do anything illegal.
This was a conference, I believe, Cartledge,
entirely of delegates-Was it not ?- You say
there were delegates assembled in the chapel ?
I understood it to be a conference between the
delegates and the Ekecutive Committee.
The JUDGE :-The meeting, you understood,
was intended for that? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. BAINES :- And
conducted exclusively by them. For instance,
I presume that Griffin took no part in it? Not
any. Was Mr. Scholefield a delegate or one of
the Executive Committee ? No; not to my.
knowledge. Are you not aware that before this
time it was understood that delegates were to
assemble in Manchester for the purpose of healing some dissensions that had broken out among
the leaders of the Chartist body ?-There had
been such dissensions ? Yes. And I am sure
you were aware, Mr. Cartledge, that one object
announced for holding this meeting, was to bring
parties to a good understanding among themselves ? Yes. Now, I ask you, was not that an
object considered important by all persons fa,vourable to Chartist principlei-to have that
good understanding? Yes. And, in addition to

interest to all persons advocating Chartist principles, I have no doubt you will tell me also that
another object of the delegates assembling on the
16th, was to do honour to the memory of Henry
Hunt, by being present at the opening of the
monument erected to his memory? The delegates were not assembled on the 16th. But was
it not intended to do honour to Hunt's memory?
Yes. Was it not considered that the opening of
that monument was an important and interesting occasion for all persons holding those principles ? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY:-Well,
sir, I have just a question or two to ask you;were you taken up for this matter ?-Of course
you were.-You are a defendant.-When were
you taken up for this matter ? I have never been
taken up for it. Have you ever been taken up
for any matte connected with Chartist proceedings ? Yes. On what occasion was that ? The
meeting on the 14th. Where abouts was that
meeting? On Mottram Moor. Where you taken
to prison ? Yes.
SThe JUDGE :-You were taken up on account
of the meeting at Mottram Moor? Yes.

Mr. MURPHY :-Where were you taken?
To Chester. Were you one of the parties that
was to be tried at the last Special Commission at
Chester? I was. How came it that you were
not put on your trial at Chester ? I traversed
my trial. You traversed? Yes. Were you kept
in prison ? I came out on bail. On bail, very
well. I believe the magistrates demanded rather
high bail of you ?-Did they not ? Yes. How
much ? Two 3001.'s, and myself in 6001.
When was it first intimated to you, that you
would be wanted as a witness here ? At Chester.
What time ? A few days before the commis.
sion. A few days before the last Special Commission? Yes. That is the Commission which
took place in last October? Yes. Who was the
party that made that intimation to you? Mr.
Irwin. *hat
is he ? An inspector of police.
Is he an inspector of police? He was then. Are
you aware that he made that communication to
you of his own accord, or in consequence of anything you stated yourself? I don't understand
the question. Had you made a communication
to any person before that, stating'your residence
and your willingness to become a witness for the
Government? I had been solicited previous to
that. Then, do you mean to tell me, that you
had been solicited to betray the confidence of
your associated, without ever having made any
move towards it yourself? I swear that. Sothat which youi tell me was an object of great lemnly ? Solemnly. Then who wa the person

130
that made that communication, previous to Mr.
Irwin ? Mr. Griffin. Oh, Griffin ! the reporter
of whom you spoke? Yes. Was Griffin a very
intimate friend of yours ? He was, and I rejected
his offer with scorn ! You rejected his offer with
scorn, and you come here in consequence ! Not
in consequence of that. Now, tell his Lordship
and the jury what were the insinuating terms
in which Griffin conveyed the gentle intimation
to you ? He told me of the danger I was placed
in in consequence of that placard. Did he tell
you that any person had told him to say that?
No. Then was that what he said to you, "You
are in great danger. You know all about the
delegates' meeting; let you and I confer together, and we will get something from the
Government ?" Nothing of the kind. Was
there no reward spoken of? None whatever.
Griffin and you made no such arrangement.Did you know what was the inducement for his
coming to you? No. When did he come? When
I was in the " Qpck-up" in Manchester. Was
that before the first examination-shortly before
the 14th of August ? It would be in September.
Do you mean to tell me that Griffin came to
you, and, at that time, asked you to turn Queen's
evidence? He did. Now, having rejected it with
scorn on that occasion, what was it that induced
you to come forward now? The Chartists branding me as a traitor, and insulting my wife in
Manchester. When did they brand you as a
traitor first? When I was in Chester Castle.
Was that after the proposition made to you by
Irwin? It was before that. And you mean
to swear that it was merely on that account
you came forward here? I saw no other way
open, being treated so badly by my own party,
and those who should have been my friends,
but to throw myself on the clemency of the
Court, and tell all I know. Did you send to
Irwin, or did he come to you? He came to me.
Now, do' you mean to tell me, that, having rejected that offer of Griffin's with scorn, you
conveyed no intimation to betray your associates,
but that Irwin came to you ?-You gave no
intimation whatever ?-What did Irwin say to
you first, when he came? He pointed out to me
the danger I ws in relative to the placard, the
conference, and the other case. He pointed out
those -dangers to you.-Then, do you mean to
swear that Griffin and he had conversation before about it ? Not to my knowledge. Is Griffin
well acquainted with your handwriting ? Yes.
Now, sir, I understand you were a schoolmaster;

had you ever any hand in the writing of those
placards, purporting to come from the Chartists ?
Yes, sometimes. Now, tell us the substance of
any you have drawn up? One calling a meeting
to petition for the life of John Frost. Have you
written anything that appeared in the form of
a placard? I don't remember any. Now, sir,
do you mean to tell me-you are upon your
oath-that that Executive Placard was not in
your own handwriting?
The JUDGE :-The MS. of the Executive
Placard ?
Mr. MURPHY :- Yes ; the MS. of the Executive Placard. Witness:-It was not in my
handwriting. Will you swear that the corrections on that proof-sheet were not in your handwriting? I will; solemnly. You swear that,
when you got this roll of paper from Heywood,
you took it to Leach's, and M'Douall brought it
up-stairs, and brought it down again.-Now, how
do you know it to be the same roll of paper ?
By the general appearance of it. Had you seen
its contents ? I had just glanced at the head of
it. When did you do that? On my way from
Heywood's to Leach's. Had you authority from
Leach so to do-to open it ? I had no authority either way. Very well-now, sir, again, I
want to ask you about Griffin.-Did you see him
after you saw him in the New Bailey, in Manchester ? I id not see him in the New Bailey.
Well, when you were at Manchester, in the
lock-up. Did you seehim afterwards ? Yes; I
saw him at Hyde. That is, when you were out
on bail ? No; that is the day I was committed.
Were you taken before the magistrates at Hyde?
Yes. And you vere committed from Hyde to
Chester Castle. Very well; and you had a conversation with Griffin that day? None. Had
you ever a conversation with Griffin but the one
about coming forward as Queen's evidence?
None. Very well; now, you told my learned
friend that you did not mean, at that time, to enter
into anything illegal yourself; is that so ? Yes.
Did you suppose, at that time, that any of the
resolutions proposed at that meeting were illegal ? I did not. You did not; do you suppose
the parties present had anything in contemplation, more than to make those parties out on
strike adopt the five points of the Charter? That
was the principal understanding. Very well.
Cross-examined by Mr. McOUBREY :-I believe it is a public place-this of Mr. Schole..
field's? Moderately so. You say you were
desired to send two men away that were in the

131
street ?I Yes. What was the object of doing
so ?-What was the reason why they were sent
away ? I don't understand you, sir; I did not
hear the question properly. What was the reason that you were told to send the two men
away ?-To keep the thing as private as possible.
Was that said ? That was the understanding.
The JUDGE :-Did he tell you that that was
the reason? That I believed to be the reason at
the time.
Mr. McOUBREY:--Have you not already assigned another reason ? Not to my knowledge.
Mr. MURPHY:-(In an under-tone.) It does
not signify a damn.
Mr. McOUBREY :-Were you not a delegat
yourself ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-From where ? Mosley.
Mr. McOUBREY :Was Griffin? No; he was
a reporter ;-I have already answered that question. How do you say that Griffin went to this
meeting, it being a meeting of delegates ? He
came to the meeting. And any other reporter
might have gone to the meeting ? I cannot
Was not Griffin objected to
answer" that.
almost immediately after he entered, but yet he
remained? Mr. O'Connor requested that he
should remain. And he did remain. Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Now,
Cartledge, I want to have a word with youWhen did you come to Lancaster ? On Tuesday.
Who did you come with ? With Mr. Irwin and
M9r. Griffin. How did you come ? By the rail
way. By the third class ? No. Second class ?
Is that
No. First class ? Yes-(laughter).
your working jacket that you have on ? It is.
Have you not got better clothes than these ? No.
I have not. Will you swear that? I will. Have
you no got a fancy waistcoat ? I believe I have
got a better waistcoat than this. What did you
give for it? Three shillings. Did you give
11. 15s: for anything lately? No. Where did
you buy the waistcoat? I don't know-in a shop
in Manchester. You don't know where ?-Are
you sure of that ? In Manchester. Whose shop ?
I don't know. Will you swear that? Yes. Did
you pay for it? I don't know. But you are not
wife
sure ? No-(laughter)-Either me or miny
paid for it. Is it paid for ? Yes. Do you know
Mrs. Knowles? I do. Did you order a coat
and waistcoat of her? Yes. When? A few
weeks since. When -did you 'get the coat?
About a fortnight ago. Did you pay for it? I
did not, and consequently it is not mine. Did
you give any notice of your intention to leave
your lodgings, or did you leave them in a hurry?
I left them in a hurry-(laughter). When I got

purpose of pledging them to bring me here.
(Much hissing in the body of the Court.) You
picked up your traps after you got these things
from Mrs. Knowles?
The JUDGE :-No, he has not got them.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-He said he bought them,
my Lord.
The JUDGE .- He said they are not mine,
they are not paid for.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Did you get them ?
WITNESS:-Yes, for the express purpose of
bringing me here. Did you pay for your seat in
the railway carriage ? Yes. Did you pledge the
coat and waistcoat ? I believe my wife has.
What was got for them on pawn ? I don't know.
You never heard ? No. Upon your oath ? I
don't know. How soon after you got the things
from Mrs. Knowles did you leave your lodgings?
I don't know. I leftmy wife there. Were you what
is called purveyor and secretary to a district cooperative store? Yes. For what district ? Manchester. That is a large district. In what district of Manchester ? Ancoats. Did you fill any
post of distinction in the Brown-street district ?
I did. Where you purveyor and furnisher of
the goods to the association? Yes. And secretary ? No. Did you settle accountg? So far as I
was concerned, I did. Was there a balance in your
favor ? No. Was it all the other way ? I don't understand the nature of the question.-(Laughter.)
Was the balance against you ? No; not when
explained. Do they charge you with owing the
money ? I believe hot.
Then what wants
explaining? I had the selling of Northern Stars,
the profits of which were to go to the Association. They did so; but certain parties ran into
debt. A fresh committee came into office, and
now they say I must be responsible for the debts
of other parties, and they lodge that to my
account. How much do you owe? I don't owe
anything.. With respect to the co-operative
stores; do you owe anything there? I don't
know how the matter stands. Do you owe
money? No. Then, do they owe you money?
No. Then you don't know how it stands ? No.
(Much laughter.) You say that the Chartists
behaved badly to your wife when you were at
Chester ? Yes. Did she go to Chester? Yes.
Who sent her there? The Chartists. Did they,
give her money ? Yes. Then, it was at Chester
that you first conceived the notion of coming

the coat and waistcoat, I got them for the express

wife sent to you?

here to give evidence? It was. And it was in
consequence of the bad treatment of the Chartists to your wife that you came here? It is.
Did you consider it bad treatment to have your
I did.--(Great laughter.)

132
You considered yourself badly treated by having
your wife sent to you! Now, sir, I think you
stated, in answer to the Attorney-General, that,
on the 14th of August, you were a Chartist?
Yes. How soon after did you read your recant-ation ? I have not read it yet. Are you still a
I still approve of the principles
Chartist?
of the People's Charter? Are you still a Chartist? Yes. Are you for Annual Parliaments ?
I am. Are you for Universal Suffrage? I am.
Are you for Vote by Ballot ? I am. Ore you
for equal electoral districts ? I am. Are you
for no property qualification for Members of
Parliament? I am. And are you for payment
of Members for their services? I am. Then
you are a good Chartist-(much laughter, andy
an attempt at cheering in the body of the Court,
which was instantly checked.)
Mr. MURPHY :-[In an under tone] I am
for the last.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-You stated that it was in
consequence of the great danger you were represented to be in from the placard of the Executive
Committee, which induced you to come here ?
Yes, and the other prosecutions. You have now
traversed, and you are to be tried at the next Assizes, unless you meet with the same leniency
you have met with here? Yes. Now I will
keep you to that. And you swear, that the corrections in that placard are not in your handwriting ? I have sworn. You have sworn most
solemnly, that the danger connected with that
placard has brought you here; and you have
.sworn most solemnly, that the corrections on
that placard are not in your handwriting? Yes
When you went to the meeting of delegates, was
there any obstruction offered? None whatever.
No one knew who were delegates until their credentials were produced ? None whatever. Are
you aware that the delegates about to assemble
in Manchester, were elected two months before
the time fixed to commemorate the erection of
the monument to Mr. Hunt ? Yes, I am aware
that they were previously elected.
The JUDGE :-A long time before? Some of
them I believe were.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-They met on the 16th, for
the purpose of Hunt's procession, and on the 17th,
they were to meet as a delegate body in conference.
The JUDGE:-This was resolved upon more
than a week before ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Two months, my Lord.
WITNESS :-Some of them had been elected

some weeks before. When were you elected? On
the night of the 16th. Now, sir, for what purpose was the delegate meeting to take place ?Was it not to examine and revise the Chartist
organization, to put it on a better footing, and if
there was anything illegal in it to alter it, and to
heal the differences that existed between some
parts of the Chartist body? That was what I
understood to be the object of the meeting. I
believe you have the honour of being an active
member of the Chartist body? I have. Did you
fill the office of Secretary to the South Lancashire
delegates ? I did. How long did you officiate in
that capacity? More than two years. During
that time, sir, did many spirited publications come
from your pen ? Some addresses did. Did anycome
from your pen, sir, that were refused publication ?
Not to my knowledge.. Will you swear that?
I will. Have you sent many addresses for insertion in the Northern Star ? Yes, I have sent
some. Have you complained of the non-insertion
of some that you sent? [Witness hesitated ].
Don't fence with the question, sir. Have you
complained, whether or not ? I believe I have.
Are you aware that while the conference was
sitting at Manchester, a deputation came from
the trades to ask for admission ? I am. Are you
aware that the conference refused to receive the
deputation because it was illegal ? I am. Are
you aware that it was distinctly said, that, if they
wished to constitute a part of the audience, they,
or any body else, might remain if they chose ? I
am.
The JUDGE :-Who applied for admission?
The trades.-Mr. O'Connor, a deputation from
the trades, my Lord, came, and they were refused
admission as a deputation from the trades,
because it would be illegal; but they were told
that they, or any other parties, might come and
compose a part of the audience. Witness:-Yes.
Now, Cartledge, we have tested that you are a
good sound Chartist.-(Laughter.) During the
last two years, how many Chartist meetings have
you attended ? A great number. Have you attended one hundred? Perhaps I have. Well, have you
attended five hundred? I think not. Have you
done your duty by attending every one within your
reach ? I have. Have you attended some meetings
at personal inconvenience, as secretary and all ?
I have. Now, sir, I ask you on your oath,
wherever a resolution was passed, at a public
meeting of Chartists, whether it was not in substance, and nearly in words, precisely the same
as that passed at the conference ? Nearly so.
Especially those words " To continue our present struggle till the Charter becomes the law of
the land ?" Yes. Is not that the exact form or

133
nearly so of every one of our resolutions?-Is it honestly; on your oath, are you not aw
not that, in substance, the form of every resolution that passed at every one of our meetings ?
The JUDGE :-Stop, you are going too
fast.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Especially those words:
they amounted to this, that they were to continue the present struggle, and the word "struggle" was found in every Chartist resolution ?
The JUDGE:-Is that so ?
WITNESS :-I believe the words were often
used. By often, you mean generally? Yes, my
Lord.
Mr. O'CONNOR :--You were a delegate
from Mosley? I was. You attended the whole
of the meetings of conference ? I attended that
on the 17th of August. On your oath, was there
one word said at the conference about the pla.
card of the Executive Committee? Nothing
more than what was said with respect to Turner,
the printer.
The JUDGE:-He said the chairman had
announced that Turner, the printer, was taken
up for printing the Executive Placard.
as it proposed to the
Mr. O'CONNOR :conference ? No. Did not you say that on Tuesday morning you sent a placard headed, "Run for
gold;" on your oath, don'tiyou know that it emanated from the trades' delegates of Manchester ?
I don't know from what source it emanated.
Don't you know that the trades recommended a
rtn for gold, and the people to withdraw their
money from the Savings' Banks ? I understood
that placard to come from Dr. M'Douall.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Are you aware thatThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Do allow him
to give the answer.
The JUDGE :-How do you know that the
placard, "Run
for gold," came fom Dr.
M'Douall? Witness :-I don't know from what
source that placard came. I thought you said,
you understood it came from Dr. M'Douall.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, he is excessively
touchy on the placard points. \Are you aware
that Griffin was reporter for the Northern Star?
I am. Were you in frequent communicatin with
Griffin? I was. Are you aware that as representing the Manchester districts, he had a very
good salary of 751. a-year ? [Excessive laughter
among the reporters.] I don't know what he
got. Are you not aware that he was .very
much annoyed at having lost that salary ?
No. Now, was not Griffin discharged from his
office as reporter for the Northern Star prior to
the meeting of delegates ? Yes. Now, Cartledge, I will ask you a question, and answer

that Griffin was discharged for having given
garbled and wrong reports of speeches made by
O
the Chartists ? Not to my knowledge.
your oath, did not M'Douall say, when he pro
posed that there should be no report of the
speeches, that he could not rely on the ac
curacy of Griffin's reports, and that he did not
wish to be misrepresented? Not to my knowledge. Was not that said in Griffin's presence,
when it was under discussion whether he should
remain or not ? Not to my knowledge. Did
not, at once, tell Griffin to remain and take
notes of all he liked, after I had discharged him?
You did. Had you any conversation with Griffin prior to the time you went before the magistrates and tendered yourself as a witness ?
had none. When did you first give over taking
an active part after the meeting on the 17th of
August? After I came from Chester. Did you
take any active part in the Chartist movement
from the time the conference was dissolved, and
how long after. I did not take so active a part
as I have done. Did you issue any publications?
Yes. When? Some time intervening between
my arrest and the time of the conference.
Did
you issue an address on the 14th of September?
Not to my knowledge. Was any address refused
in the Northern Star, about that time ? Not that
I know of. Did you publish one in the Evzenihg
Star ? Tell me the time ? - The 14th of Septe mber., Would you know the address if you saw it ?
Yes. Was that address refused insertion in the
NorthernStar? The addressbore my name. Who
first sent for you and examined you? Mr. Drake
Where ? At Chester. Were you then unwilling
to come here? I was unwilling. Is Irwin's
name Drake? No. I thought it was he who
examined you first? No, I consented to giveevidence to Irwin, but Drake examined me. How
soon, after you had consented to Mr. Irwin that
you would come, did Mr. Drake examine you?
The next day. ,How often have you been in
Griffin's company,, from that time to the present?
I have not been in his company; I started on
this journey since I left Manchester. You distinctly swear that? I do. What did Mr. Drake
or Mr. Irwin say to you, when he asked you to
give this information ? They pointed out the
difficulty and danger I was in [witness hesitated].
Well, well, well, what then ?
And at last
I consented to give evidence. On what condition ? Unconditionally.
Wholly unconditionally ? Yes; After your wife was sent to you-

I
k

K

134
the first offence they gave you-how many of
the persons who met at the conference were
unknown to you? I can't say. How many
were perfect strangers to you ? Some of them
were. 1How many? I don't know the number.
Was there a youth admitted-a child-a boy-a
brother conspirator ? Yes. Now, sir, youhave attended hundreds of meetings. On your oath, and
I ask you boldly, did you ever hear me express one
word or a sentence at variance with the duty of
a good subject ? Not to my knowledge. That
is, you did not hear me. On your oath, have
yof not heard me complain, and complain loudly,
of the misrepresentation that I had to encounter,
and that there was no man in England who had
been so much misrepresented through the medium of the press as I had? You have. Have
you not heard me in the most emphatic and convincing language that it was possible for a man
to use, endeavour to point out to the people the
folly of violating the peace in any, the slightest
respect? You have. Do you know a man of
better character in the world than James Leach?
I do not, sir. How, long have you known him ?
Several years. About what time was tranquillity restored in Manchester ? Very soon after the
conference. I will ask you, as an honest man,
whether or know you think that the object of the
conference, and the tendency of the speeches
made, was to preserve the peace, and to keep the
people out of violence ? I believe it was. Now,
sir, I place before you a file of the Evening Star,
of the 14th of September, 1842. Was the address of the South Lancashire delegates to their
constituents written by you ? It was.
The file of the above newspaper was put in,
and the officer of the Court read from it the following address :" THE ADDRESS OF THE. SOUTH LANCASHIRE DELEGATES TO THEIR
CONSTITUENTS, AND THE CHARTISTS GENERALLY.
"Brothers in bondage and in hope,-We
conceive it to be our duty to address you at
this critical juncture in the affairs of this classridden country. Since we first met on your behalf, many have been the struggles in which you
have had to engage in your different localities,
Though the conflict is fearful, the contest
is not doubtful when a united people firmly
standagainst the unrighteous aggressions of classconstituted tyranny. During these last few
weeks, the monstrous power of the capital in
the hands of the middle classes has been more
especially arrayed against the hand that*gave it
birth. After enjoying all the comforts and luxuries of life-rioting in voluptuousness as the
swine wallows in the mire-the middle classes,

both Whig and Tory, have united all their power
for the purpose of depriving the honest artisan,
not only of the commonest comforts, but even
those necessaries which make life desirable or rather bearable. The position in which we are now
placed by the scheming of our oppressors, calls
for prudence as well as courage on our part, that
the pit dug for our destruction may receive those
who are a curse to our existence. Our wives
look at our progress with anxious eyes, and with
feelings of anguish ask how long shall the oppressor triumph ? Our children cry for bread, and
when we meet to consult together, our rulers
give us sticks, bludgeons, steel, and lead, and
then they call upon us to obey.the law.
"'When pinched with want all reverence they
withdraw,
For hungry multitudes obey no law.'
So sung the Roman poet Lucan: and later experience has proved the truth of the sentence; for
the only things which the 'present unjust laws
of England in operation are the enormous
physical force powers of the ruling few, and the
disunion of the working many. Under these it
is most politic to keep within the grade of the law,
if possible, though all must admit that this is very
difficult. What may bequite legal in oneis treason
in another unfortunate wight. The fact is, there
is one law for the rich, and another for the poor.
Nothing can more clearly evince this than the
conduct of the powers that be during the last six
months. Whilst the tools of, the rich Anti-cornt
law League were going through the land, pouring
forth their inflammatory moonshine, advising the
people to repeal the Corn-laws, even by the point
of the sword-to go in thousands, and tens of
thousands, and demand bread-to destroy the
bread-taxers root and branch. Yes, these
" ' Speakers turbulent and bold
Of venal eloquence that serves for gold
And principles that might be bought and
sold,'
went forth and endeavoured to cause a popular
outcry against these obnoxious laws. Yet no
warrants are issued for speaking sedition, neither
are they arrested for conspiring, even when the
machinations of these men produced the late
strike, so long as it was likely that it could be
used for the accomplishing of the schemes of
the free trade gentry; there is nothing talked of
but how they must support the people by these
lovers of fair play. No sooner do the brave and
honest trades of Manchester declare for principle, and the people in every part respond to the
call-no sooner is the tocsin of the Charter
sounded-no sooner is the breaking of the bonds
of the slave proclaimed, than all the middle class

135,
unite. The press marks the victims. The go- from the minds of our brethren of the sister isle,
vernment, strong in arms, sends forth the har- yet there remains much to be done; and, in our
pies of the law to seize-spies to concoct and opinion, nothing is more calculated to produce
convict, and thus endeavour to stifle free dis- that change, so much desired, than to send a
cussion, and put down democracy. It is the man of sterling honesty to open the eyes of the
duty of every Chartist to buckle on his armour blind, and to remove the veil of prejudice from
afresh, and renew the fight with increased vigour the minds of those who have been led to believe
and energy, until signal success shall crown our that the working classes, of England were the
efforts. Let us so rally our forces as to convince enemies of their brethren, the working classes ofeven our oppressors that we are determined to Ireland. If each locality, belonging to the Naachieve our liberty in spite of every opposition, tional Charter Association, would subscribe only
and that nothing short of political power to pro- one penny a week, and sixpence as a first subtect our labour will satisfy the working classes scription to start the fund, we should have as
of this country. The pulpit and the press are much as would support one, and something
teeming with calumny and abuse against you, more. In this way the principles of Chartism
and those who have honestly dared to support could and would be made known where they
the rights of labour against the aggressions of had never been heard of, only through a disheartless capitalists. The bar is showering tor- torted medium. This can be done in a legal and
rents of misrepresentation to induce middle class constitutional way, without endangering any one,
juries to convict your best friends; whilst the or placing a burden upon the shoulders of any
bench is waiting with anxiety to dungeon and person.
expatriate those who have possessed so much of
"We feel the delicacy of calling upon you
the milk of human kindness as to declare for for pecuniary support at this critical period of
right against might. Let not these things dis,- general distress, and when so many claims are
courage you, but rather stimulate you to make made upon an impoverished people; but this
an effort to bring this unrighteous system of subject has been two months before the people
class-legislation to an end. Do all you. can to of South Lancashire, and they have confirmed
show your sympathy with those who are vic.the recommendation by commencing the fund,
timised on your behalf. Spare all you can for as they have a man they can confidently recomthe support of their families, and thereby cheer imend for this work. Mr. P. M. Brophy has
the inmates of the gloomy cell, and'encourage consented to uedertake this object, as soon as
others to beard tyranny in its den. Spread- the there is sufficient in the fund to enable him to
principles of Chartism-the principles of truth commence his lectures in his native land. Some
and justice-in your own neighbourhoods. Let localities may be so situated as to be able to deevery Chartist endeavour to make one convert, vote a collection after a lecture occasionally to
confirm one wavering mind every week. We this great and glorious object, and thus the flag
would ask, is this too much for seven days. Look of freedom may be made to wave on every
round-h6w many of your acquaintances are ig- breeze that wafts across the Emerald Isle.
norant of true politics-are careless about pdli"All subscriptions for this object to be sent
tical power-are halting between two opinions ? to Mr. James Cartledge, 34, Lomas-street, BankHere is a field for the exercise of every diver- top, Manchester. And now, in conclusion,
sity of talent. Let none say he is not qualified, brother Chartists and friends, we trust that you
but to work at once; for whilst we admit the will press on to the mark of your high calling in
usefulness of lectures, and speeches, and resolu- the'People's Charter.
tions, we confess that it is each man, doing his
"We are yours,
own work, that must carry the People's Charter.
"In the bond of union,
It is necessary to send lecturers to break up
William Cornett,
Henry Worthington,
the fallow ground. There is much of this yet;
John Butterworth,
Robert M'Farlane,
and one particular part we would call your espeDan Haslem,
Edward Hall,
cial attention to at this time. Ireland has many,
William Woodrooffe,
William White,
very many, things to impede the spread of the
Robert Beaumont,
Ashton Ashton.
pure principles of freedom; and though O'HigThomas Railton, Chairman.
James Cartledge, Secretary."
gins, and his brave band, assisted by the NorthCross-examination resumed:-Now, Mr. Cartera Star, have done much to dispel the mist

136
edge, on your oath, was not that address sent to what you iwere to say here ? No. Not a word !
the Evening Star because the Northern Star re- you never spoke a word to Irwin about what you
fused to publish it ? I sent copies to both. Did had to say here ? There might be something
t appear in the Northern Star? I believe it did. about it. What was it? The principal converDon't you know that it did not, and that there sation was relative to the danger in which I
might be placed. That had a powerful effect
ght be placed. Th had a powerful rf
were complaints in consequence ? The complaint
on you? It had. Did you go and see your wife
when you returned from Lymm to Manchester ?
was that the names were omitted.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Have you No. Now, from the time you were at Lymm
done with it?
first, and then returned, where were you ? At
Mr. O'CONNOR :-It never did appear.
Manchester. Was it there you got the coat ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The witness Yes. And the waistcoat? Yes. When did you
says it did appear, but the names did not appear get the other parts of your dress ? About six or
.to it.
nine weeks ago. Now, sir, on your oath, again,
Mr. O'CONNOR :--It never did appear.
I ask you, do you mean to say there was not one
The JUDGE :--He says he does not know.
word about this trial during the whole time you
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Were not you and Griffin were with Griffin and Irwin? I cannot say that.
in the habit of composing addresses together ?- Were you told you were relieved from consider.
Haveyou not written several addresses.from South able danger ? 1 never had surety till this jury
Lancashire ? Yes. You giving him notes, and he acquitted me. Had you any promises made
&givingyou? It is not often I took notes. No, you? I had no promises made me. None,
but you wrote for each other ? Yes. Now, sir, whatever ? None, whatever. Did any one tel
conversation between you and M'Douall appears you to say you had no promises made you? No,
to have been very unguarded.-When was it that sir. Had you lived in the house with Griffin ?
that he referred to the placard " Run for gold ?" No. Did you eat onions and beef-steaks togeAt the conference. On your oath, did you not ther on Tuesday night? No. Did you sup
say that it was on the 16th ?-Don't you know together ? We did. Had you any conversation
that the Trades' Delegates met on the 15th, and then ? Ye. About this trial ?,Yes. What was it ?
were dispersed on the 16th ? Yes, I know they We wondered how it was going on. But nobody
were dispersed. When you were elected, were you told you ? No. Not a soil ? No. Had you
not chosen to sit at a conference at Carpenters' any conversation about it before you came in
Hall, and was not that, originally, the place to-day ? Yes. With Whom? With Griffin.
in which the conference was to be held ? What was that conversation ?-Did any one tell
I believe it was: When you 'gave up the office you the Crown was failing to 'make out a ase ?
of purveyor and secretary to the Hulme Co- No. Did you say you would assist them to
operative Store , did you give up the books? I make a case? Not to my knowledge. You did
did. You don't know how the accounts 'stand? not? Not to my knowledge. What did you
Not exactly. Where have you been for the last get when'you pawned the things ? I told you
three weeks, Cartledge ?-You have not got thembefore I did not know. But you did not pay
now? In Manchester. For the whole time ?. A before-I did not know. But you did not pay
fortnight ago I was at Lymm, in Cheshire. How your own expenses here ? No. When you went
long were you there ? I went one day and came to Lymm, was it necessary for you to go ? I went
back the next. And during the last three weeks, on Saturday night. What for? To see Irwin.
you have never seen Griffin? Not before last You went to Lymm, and came back afterwards;
Sunday night. When did you come here, and whether would it not be shorter to come direct
were did you come from? From Lymm, a fort- from Manchester at'once ?-Which is the shortnight ago. I thought you were at Lymm one est way? I don't know. How did you go to
day and came back the next? I haye been at Lymm ? With Irwin. Does he keep a good'
Lymm twice. Ah, sir, you are a limb. (Laugh- house ? I was not at his house. Was Griffir
ter). When. did you come her6 ? On Tuesday. with you ? Not till Sunday night, when he
Where did you see Griffin then? Here. Where arrived from Ireland. You did not go to Irwin's
did
syouto f'o Lm? rT Lancaster. On house at all! Who paid your expenses to Lymm?
go
ym
? No. (Where did you remain on Sun- Irwin. Who paid for your* living while there?
Sunday
day)? On Tuesday. Then you remained at He did. Who brought youhere? Irwin. Who
Lymm on Monday ? Yes.- In company with is now paying for your living, while here?
Irwin ? Yes.

You did not hear a sentence about Irwin.

How long is it since you have been at'

137
work, Cartledge? I have been partly at work SatChester, during the time of the excitement
since I was at Chester. What kind of work? instead ofThe JUDGE :-Instead of traversing? Yes,
At school-teaching. How much have you earned
-since you left Chester? I cannot say? About my Lord.
The 'ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - While
'how much ?-What kind of employment were
Griffin was taking notes, or about to take notes
you in? I told you already; I had my school
at the conference, dill
you hear any body makart of the time. What did your school mike ing any objection tQ him as a reporter, to the
for you? About six ,or seven shillings a week. effect that he could not be trusted? No; he
Have you seen your examinations ? I never saw referred to other reporters; he referredto Mr.
them'; I don't kriow what they were. Have you Hill, as reporter to the Northern Star. Was
seen any paper, or any written document, con- Hill there as reporte to the Northern Star.
'cerning what was said on this trial ? No. Have He stated distinctly that he and Griffin were the
you had any conversation with Irwin, Beswick, only reporters present. 'Was Hill a delegate as
well as reporter ? Yes, and he said the delegates
or any one, relative to this trial ? No.
Cross-examined by the defendant JOHN- might trust to his discretion.
GEORGE BARLOW, a boy 15 years of age,
SON:-Am I the person alluded to by yoU in
examined by Mr. HILDYARD : - What are
the course of this examination ? No.
I am an apprentice to Ellerby and
Cross-examined by M'CARTNEY: - Mr. you?
Cartledge, you haye spoken of a table at the Cheetham, letter-press-printers, Manchester. In
meeting of the conference at which [table] the the month of August last were you an appren-secretary was to receive cfedentials. Now, are you tice to Charles Turner, of Turner-street, Mannot aware that those documents, to which you chester? Yes. Do you remember your master,
.have referred under the term credentials, were
in August last, to set the types and print the
'or the purpose of shewing that the delegates
placards of the Executive Committee ? Yes.
were legally elected for the purpose of attending
Who brought the MS. from whence that plhcard
'that meeting ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-That is what you understood (handing a copy of the Executive Placard to
vutness) was printed? Either two or 'three
by credentials ? Yes, my Lord.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENE- men, I am not sure which. Did you know who
'RAL :-You were asked whether the original they were at the time ?
MS. roll was in your handwriting ? Yes. You
The JUDGE :-You don't inow who brought
said no. Yes. May I ask you in whose hand- it? Two or three men; I don't know which.
-writing it was ? In Dr. M'Douall's.
Mr. HILDYARD:-Did they tell you where
The JUDGE:-That is the original M.S. of you were to apply for information, if you could
the Executive Placard? Yes, my Lord.
not make out the writing ? Yes. Where was
TheATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Mr. O'Con- that? At Leach's. Very well; did any one,
nor asked you about your being secretary at the during the afternoon, apply to
see if a proof was
Ancoats and Brown-street district-how long
ready? Yes, sir; at half-past three in thg
were you so?-Were you so weeks or months ?Or.how long'? Some months. When did you afternoon. Did your master, Mr. Turner, see
give over being so ? When the co-operative that person? Yes.
concern, to which Mr. O'Connor referred," ,The JUDGE :-At half-past three in the
broke up. When did it break up ?'
About twelve afternoon was it ? Yes, my Lord.
months ago. 'Was it long before that when you
Mr. HILDYARD:-Did you hear your maswere received among the delegates ?-Was it ter address him as M'Douall? Yes. Was a
'some months before you were elected to go to proof ready at that time ? No. Did the person
the conference? Perhaps twelve months before give directions to where it should be sent when
that. You were asked whether it was bad treat- the proof was ready ? He gave directions
ment to send your wife to you.-Now, in what
that it should le sent to Noblett's.
way did they insult your wife ? By denouncing
The JUDGE: - That is, the person who
me as a traitor in her presence. -Very good.
brought it ?
WITNESS :-May I be allowed to explain to
Mr HILDYARD:-No, my Lord; the person
the Court, why I considered my wife's coming
who applied to see if a proof was ready. To
to Chester, to be bf no advantage to me?
witness :-Did. that person return again in the
The JUDGE :-Certainly..
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Why? - evening, with a proof in his hand ? Yes Had
Witness :--Because I believe she was sent there that proof been corrected ? Some correction s
'by the Chartists, to persuade me to take my trial had been made, but not all.

Should you know

138
again, do you think, if you saw that proof ? Yes.
Now just look at that, will you ?-[handing witness the proof.] Yes, sir; this is it. That is
the same which was brought back by your master from M'Douall. Now, on the following
morning, did that person come to your master's
shop ?
Mr. MURPHY :-On what morning?
Mr. HILDYARD :-The following morning,
but he can't say exactly it was the 17th, I believe.
[To Witness.] What did he say on coming back
the following morning? He wanted a part of it
taken out. Did he give any reason ? He said
it might bring some trouble on them. What did
your master say, upon that? He said it would
be a great deal of trouble. To do what ? To
take it out. Upon that, what did the person reply ? He consented to let it stay in. Did he
give any directions as to what was to be done
with the placards ? Bill posters were to have
them, and 50 were to be kept for.himself.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY :-Had you
ever seen this person before, whom your master
addressed by name ? I had not. Now, where
is your master.-Has he come over here to Lancaster ? Not that I know of. So that you know
nothing of who the person was, except that he
was called M'Douall? No. Now, will you undertake to say, that he used the name M'Douall
to the person that came, or that h~ used that
name in speaking of some person? No, he
meant the person that came; he answered to
M'Douall.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON:-Now,
my boy, you have spoken of two days. Now, it
was on the first of. these days the type was
set up? Yes, it took all the afternoon. Was the
type set up immediately after the manuscript
came? Yes, sir. And can you say what time
the manuscript was brought-I mean to the
lour? About 12 o'clock.
The JUDGE :-Does any other defendant ask
a question? No answer.
SMr. ATHERTON :-How long did it take to
set up the type ? It came about twelve o'clodk,
and was done about five or six o'clock. Finished?
Yes.
THOMAS SUTTON, examined by Mr. HILDYARD:-You are now, I believe, an apprentice
to Wm. Irwin? Yes. In the month of August
last, were you an apprentice to Charles Turner,
of Manchester ? Yes. Did you assist your
master in setting up thl type of the Executive
Address, on the 16th of August last ? Yes, sir.
Were you present when any one brought a manu-

script to your master's, from whence the'type was
to be set up? Yes. Who broight it? Three
men. Did you then, or do you now, know who
these tree men were ? No. Did they give directions to whom you were to send, if you could
not make out the writing in the manuscript ?
No. What directions did they give ? Mr.
Turner was to send up to Leach's. To enquire
for whom there? For M'Douall. Was there a
difficulty in making out the manuscript ? Yes.
Did you go to Leach's.? Yes. Did you enquire
for M'Douall ? Yes, and a boy in Leach's shop
was sent up-stairs for him. The boy went upstairs and called him down.
Mr. MURPHY :-The witness does not say
that.
Mr. HILDYARD :-On that enquiry being
made, a boy went up-stairs and M'Douall came
down.
Mr. MURPHY :-He does not say so.
Mr. HILDYARD:-Well, a man came down

stairs ?
WITNESS :-Yes, one of the three men who
came to my master's came in and looked at the
manuscript, and while he was doing so, some one
osme down stairs- Did the person looking at
the manuscript address thd man who came down
stairs ? Yes. By what name did he address
him? As M'Douall. Did the person so addressed as M'Douall, look at the manuscript ?
Yes. What did he say? He read a portion of it
over.
The JUDGE :-Loud ?-So that you could
hear him ? Yes, myLord. Do you mean, that
he read it loud-not to himself ? Not to himself,
but so that I could hear.
Mr. HILDYARD:-And then what did he
say? He said he had not time to look it all over
then, but that we were to send the proof up to
him at Leach's. Did he call at your master's
shop at four or five o'clock in the afternoon of
the same day ? Yes. Was the proof ready then ?
No. Did he call again at seven o'clock? Yes.
Was he at that time printing it ?,
WITNESS:-Who?
Mr. HILDYARD :-The same person. Did
he look at the proof and make alterations in it?
Yes. Now, look at that, [handing witness the
proof-sheet of the Executive Placard] and say
whether these are the alterations which he made ?
Yes, these are the alterations which he made.
Did he give any directions respecting the placard? Yes. What were they? He said they
were to strike off 100 that night.
The JUDGE :'-One hundred copies ? Yes,
my Lord.
Mr. HILDYARD .- Did he say what was to

139
be done with them ? That the poster would call
for them. Did the poster call for the placards
that night ? Yes, and got 100 copies. Did the
same person, of whom we were speaking, who
was called M'Douall, call again ? Yes, he called
the next morning.
The JUDGE :-Call him M'Douall/now; we
have got the name.
Mr. HILDYARD :-I believe you did not
hear what passed between him and your master?
#No. On the same day your master was taken
*
into custody, with the type? Yes.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Where
do you live now, my boy ? At Victoria Bridge,
Manchester. What is your master's name ?
Irwin. That is all.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY :-I wish
to ask him one word.-This person, whoever he
was, came and took the manuscript, and said he
had not time then to look it over ? Yes. It was
a manuscript and not a proof-sheet you took to
him ? A manuscript. That portion of the manuscript which you wished to be informed of ? Yes.
Was there much of it obscure? A few words
here and there.
1he ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Do you recollect whether-if?" despair," or "despond,"
that was there ? [Pointing out the place on the
placard.] No.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--You are in the
" Slough."
JOHN HEAP, examined by Mr. POLLOCK:You are the constable of Todmorden? I am,
sir. Do you know Robert Brooke ? Yes, sir.
What is he? A schoolmaster. Does he live at
Todmorden ? He does, sir. Had you a warrant
to apprehend him in August last ? In September, sir. Where did you arrest him? At his
own house. On that day? On that day, sir.
Did you search the house? I did, sir. Did you
find any books and papers there ? I did, sir.
Will you examine the contents of that parcel,
[handing it to witness] and state whether these
are what you found at that time ? [Some books
are handed to witness by Mr. Gregory, the
solicitor.] Yes, sir. Did you mark upon them
at the time ? I did, sir. How many pieces of
paper are there ? There are three here, sir. Look
at the book, did you find that paper there ?
[Handing to witness a paper.] I did, sir. And
that one? [Handing him another.] I did, sir.
Did you mark that paper? I did, sir. Did you
mark thatone? [Handing him another.] I did,
sir. Now, where did you find them? In his

house. In what room in his house? In the
living part. Did you tell Mr. Brooke what you
had come about ? I did. Did he say anything ?
He said if he had known I had been coming,
he would not have had either books or papers it
the house. Was that after you found the
papers ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-Was that what Brooke said?
Yes, my Lord.
Mr. POLLOCK:-Who did you hand these
papers over to ? To Mr. Eastwood, solicitor.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-What
time of the day was it you went to Mr. Brooke's
house ? About one o'clock. Did you find him
at home ? Yes. Is he a family man ? He has a
wife. I meant that.-Has he any children ? Yes.
Was he sitting in the living part of the house, as
you call it. No, he was standing. But he was
in the house ? Yes. I shewed him the warrant,
and he looked at the name of it, and then we
began to search. Who was with you ? A police
officer and a constable belonging to the township.
When you were there, was his wife in ? Yes.
You went pulling about the drawers and opening
them? Yes. And he made no opposition? No, sir.
And when you found the papers, did you say anything to him ? No, sir, nothing particular.
Mr. DUNDAS:-No, sir
The JUDGE :-I suppose no body else wishes
to ask him anything else ? [No answer.]
Mr. EASTWOOD, examined by Mr. WORTLEY :-I believe you are a solicitor at Todmorden? Yes, sir. Did the last witness (Heap)
hand to you the papers which you have in your
hands ? There were two parcels sealed up which
the last witness handed to me. Did you at any
time read them over for the purpose of deciphering them ? I examined these pencil notes with
Mr. Part, yesterday; first examining the pencil
notes, and then that copy, [Handing a copy to
counsel] each with the other, and that appears
to be a copy of the pencil notes.
Mr. DUNDAS:-Let me see them. [The
notes are handed to Mr. Dundas.] , These three
papers purport to be copied from these ? Witnes :-I first read the pencil notes, and afterwards,
with Mr. Part, compared them with the copy.
The copies are correct.
Mr. WORTLEY :-It is better to hand the
pencil notes up fo the Judge, and then compare
them with the copy.
Mr. DUNDAS :-When were they brought
before the magistrates do you say ? On the 6th.
LUKE BARKER examined by Mr. WORTLEY :-Where do you live? I live at Wicken
bury-clough, near Todmorden. Do you know
Robert Brooke, the schoolmaster ? Yes. Is that
pencil writing [handing witness a paper] his?

140
tssI nlieve it is. 'Is the pencil writing in that
[iadiang him another paper] his? Yes, I believe
it
Is. the pencil writing in 5hat [a third paper]
li? Yes. Look at the other side. Is thepenaing on that side in his handwriting? Yes, I
1-eieve this is his penciling. Do you believe
handing him another paper] to be in hns
Imdawriting? Yes, sir, that is his. And thati.md that ? [Handing him others] Yes, sir.
Mr. DUNDAS:-The witness (Heap) only
pmyed five.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Ile proved the whole of
thse that were lying there.
'The JUDGE :-Heap proved Six.
Mr. DUNDAS -If so, my Lord, it is only
an erroron my part, but I think ieonly proved
fiveJDE:Wa
eprvsetnst
TeJUDGE :-What
proves extends to
al that were found there. Witness was then
handed a book,,and having inspected it, he said
he,cold not speak to its being in the hiandwritimg of' Brooke.
Mr. HILDYARD :-Can you speak to any
part of it? AWitness then pointed out the words
#.,'.Meeting of Counsel" as being in the hand.
writng o Broke.Mr.
r.HILDYARD ;-Mark it dono0h
maMgin where you think it is his handwriting.
Mr. EASTWOOD re-called,
Mr-. 1-ILDYARD:-I thiuik I understood
to say, that, having compared these scraps
with the penciling you found them a correct
copy? Yes, this is a copy as far as ire could deaIpher thme
notes.

you

LUKE

BARKER re-called.

The greater part is written by-him. Show me
some part of it which you dht to he his?
Here are some parts which I doubt about, but
they were written with different pens. How do
you know hi
in the 's and i's. What is Your belief on the
sjtsbject?-sn
this [pointing out this] is his writing, hut it has
some resemblance to it. Well, now, let me see
something which you say is lii? I believe this
is his, and this.too, [pointing out two passages
in the book] but they are written with two different pens. Well, let us see. [The hook is
handed to Mr. Dundas.] Examine this again,
Mr. Barker, and see whether the writing in the
book and the penciling are in the same hiand. I
neap a
w them before, but want your opinion
upon the matter. [Returns the book to witness.]
I have not, but the penciling is in his writing.
Well, now, look at the last page, of the book ?
It has some resemblance to it, but it is not his
regular form.
Mr. HILDYARD :-Possibly it may he his.
DUNDAS :-Anythingrmay be 'possible.
Mr. HILDYARD :-But lie does no~t repudiate
it. You have not the penciling is his ? No;
none whatever. Will you say. the writing in
the book is liii? Yes; the greatest portion
of the book. Well, show me the portion' of
the book that is not by him ? Here is a letter
from Beesley which is not in the handwriting of
Brooke.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON :-Are
you a schoolmaster ? Yes. You don't conjoin
with the trade of schoolmaster that of journey-

Mr. DUNDAS :-You say you know Robert
rooke ? Yes. Is there any person of the name
of Brookes at Todmorden? Yes, there are two
Blrookes. Who wrote this name "Brookes? "
-[Laughter.]
Witness (indighRtert
Brookes. What are you? A schoolmaster. man
What opportunities have you had of knowing his nantly)-What (1 you mean,
wray
Mr. ATHERTON :-Were you never a jourwriting ? Well, about 8 or 9 years ago I
to school. there. When did you leave ? It is neynian tailor in Stalybridge ? No, sir ; I never
about years ago since I left that night-school. was in Stalybridge. Were you the postmaster of
you known anything of his handwriting Todmorden? No, sir.
then ? Yes, I have seen his handwriting
Mr. EASTWOOD, re.examined by Mr. HILDfrequently, but I have not seen any of it since last
you present before the magissaunmer. Have you seen any of his handwriting trates when Brooke was
Yes, sir.
last summer? Yes, the days were long Was this writing pointed out in his presence as
I had some writing to do, and he did a part, being his ? It was.
wre wrote together. Did you ever see him write
Mr. IIILDYARD :-And now, my Lord, I
inpencil ? Frequently, more so than with the propose to hand up the penciling to your LordThen, from your acquaintance with his ship. The witness will read the copy, and then
handwriting, you take w' you to say, that your Lordship will be able to see whether it is
that penciling is his ? I can't he positive, correct., (To the witness) -Are these papers in
bot I believe it is. Just let me see that por- the state in which you received them ? I think
of the book which you cannot speak to ? so ; I handed them to Mr. Gregory when I

tailor?

of

vent. 7
H~ave
ince
since
and

pen.

tine

YARD:-Were

sir?

examined?

141
received them. But were they then as difficult
to decipher as they are now ? I think so.
Mr. HILDYARD :-My Lord, you will see it
begins at August 16th, at the top of the righthand corner. Witness :-I make out, my Lord,
at the top of the right-hand corner, "August
16th." In the next line, my Lord, I make "At
a delegate meeting."
The JUDGE:-I can't see it.
Mr. HILDYARD:-Well, my Lord, if you
look below the ink, your Lordship will see "Credentials."
The JUDGE :-I see it perfectly.
Mr. HILDYARD :-I am now pointing your
Lordship's attention to the lower part.
The JUDGE:-"At a delegate meeting,
August 16th." Then under that " Credentials."
Mr. HILDYARD :-That is below the ink.
Mr. DUNDAS :--Don't attempt to fill up the
word.
The JUDGE:--It is " Credentials."
WITNESS:-" Moved by Mr. Doyle, that
Mr. O'Connor is"The JUDGE :-Stay, this is not the copy.
WITNESS :-"

Moved by Mr. Doyle, that

Mr. O'Connor is invited here by Mr. Hill:
Moved by Dr. M'Douall."
The JUDGE :-Dr. ?-That is not here.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Then I object to the copy.
The JUDGE :-Well, I will read if I can.
WITNESS proceeds:-" That the delegates

give a small report of the position of their districts. Adjourn to nine o'clock to morrow
morning.
AT A MEETING CALLED ESPECIALLY.

Resolved :-" That each person have only one
vote."-(That is what it is) -" At the adjourned meeting on August the 17th, where
many fresh delegates were admitted.
"Moved by O'Conner, and passed, that each
speaker when making a motion, shall have
five minutes to speak; and when replying,
two minutes; and that each person have five
minutes allowed"Mr. DUNDAS:-[A sensible rule, my Lord.]
"That the address be read-moved by O'Connor."
*R. H. Bairstow, Britol, 22,000 persons."
[That is the population, my Lotd.] " There
to be a desire to aid the movementtor the
Charter-all the working-party would not
carry out the present movement."
John Massey, Newton-heath. "They was turned
out for wages, but do think that it would substantially.
Mr. Fletcher, Bradford, 15,000 present at the
meeting on Sunday. "The resolutions were for
the Charter.

"Todmorden people and us, were coming into
Halifax at the same.
Rev. W. Hill, Eckmonwike. "The people do
not wish to connect themselves with the
strike.
John Smith, Leeds, 80,000 people. "The feeling would be against the strike.
Thomas
Oldham. "A division.
Thomas Frazer, Leeds district. "The Colliers
are determined to c-a-r.
John Hallison, Stockport. "Resolved, not to
go to their work, until this conference ended.
At another meeting passed, that ther stand
only for the wages, &c.
James Taylor, Ashton-under-line. "Masters
and shopkeepers, had a meeting-and a meeting passed, that the Charter be agitated for.
James Hoyle, Salford. " Several mills have
commenced-the wages the same.
James Thornton, Bolton. "Great many went
in this morning.
John Norman, Warrington. "If the turn-out
goes on generally, they will come out andWilliam Clark-" Opposed to connecting
this movement with the Charter.
-Dewsbury. "We turned out on Thursday, and have been cautious some time, but
we are now determined to go for the strike
being connected.
John Shaw, Huddersfield. "The town was in
a state of confusion, and they do not wish to
connect themselves with the strike.
Christopher Doyle, Manchester.
"They are
determined to stand out until the Charter.
James Grosby, Hull. "Are not expected to
take any part in the strike.
Moved by Doctor MDouall. "That there be
nothing published but the resolutions.
Thomas Cooper, Leicester. "The men will
cease to work, if the conference recommended
they went to fight in the Potteries."
[Mr. EASTHOPE, in answer to a question
from Mr. DUNDAS, said:-A day or two after
the papers were taken, the Attorney for the prisoner, Brooke, examined the whole of these.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Is Stansfield here?
Mr. EASTTOPE :-No. Oh! the gentleman
employed as Brooke's attorney and I examined
the whole of these papers, with these copies in
my office.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Yohx are aware that the
gentleman now defending Brooke, is not Stansfield ?
Mr. EASTHOPE :-No. Mr. Stansfield, who
was then his attorney, applied to me, and examined the papers along with me.]
William Beesly, Lancashire.
"Never trust
those who hunt so shuch for Fisical.

142
Feargus O'Connor, Nottingham. "They are
in a good position.
James Chippendale, Halifax.
G. J. Harney, Sheffield.
'Samuel Parks, Sheffield. "No connection with
the middle class."
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I beg leave to ask the
Attorney-General, how he intends to put in these
papers? Whether as narratives-admissions-or
confessions ?
The JUDGE :-These are papers found on the
party apprehended.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-But, my Lord, they are
mere narratives of what occurred, and are not
admissable except on the party on whom they
were found.
The JUDGE:-How can other parties object
as to what evidence may be brought against
Brooke ?' In all cases of conspiracy, there are
proofs advanced which may not be brought
against other people. 'This is evidence against
Brookes.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I suppose this is similar to
the case of King and Watson, where the question was raised, whether the confessions of a coconspirator could be given in evidence at all.
The JUDGE:-The question is there, whether or not they were'in possession of that
evidence, at the time the party was apprehended?
If time elapses between the apprehension of the
party and his being taken away, and you find
documents afterward in his possession, non constat-they came there afterward. The late celebrated case of Blanchardand Sidney, is similar
to this, there the documents were found in the
possession of the prisoner, ' as in the present instance,' in the moment of his apprehension. " Richard Otley, Sheffield. They do notagree
to come outfor physicalforce.
Thomas Railton, Joiners and Carpenters, Manchester. They have come out for the Charter.
James Cartledge, Mosley.
They agree to
make the move into a Charter movement.
Robert Ramsden, Manchester. Youths.
James Mooney, Colne. 22,000 persons. They
are wishful to join the present movement into
the Charter.
James Arthur, Newcastle. We determine to
take advantage of the present moment.
Barnard M'Cartney, Liverpool.
[The
JUDGE :-Here you are getting beyond me.]
Apathetic.
Thomas Mahon, Stalybridge. Charter thrown
overboard.
John Leach, Hyde. They are determinedkeep out for the Charter.
The JUDGE :-I can't make that out. Witness :-There is a great difference in the light,
my Lord.

David Morrison, Eccles.
Good feeling prevails with regard to, and they think it would be
best to go for the whole Charter.
John Lomax, Burnley. Some have gone in.
Moved by Mr. Bairstow, and seconded by Mr.
O'Connor.
The JUDGE :-Unless it is very important.
perhaps we might dispense with reading the remainder, these notes are so daubed and smeared,
it is very difficult to make them out.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I entirely
accede to your Lordship's suggestion, if your
Lordship does not see at once what it is, I at
once accede.
Mr. HILDYARD:-You will see, my Lord,
that it was afterwards moved by Dr. M'Douall,
and seconded by Mr. M'Cartney, and carried" That we abstain from intoxicating drinks."
The JUDGE:-I suppose all the AttorneyGeneral wants to show is this-that there was
found in the possession of this man, when he
was taken, a narrative of what occurred at the
meeting of delegates.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL :-Yes, my
Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY:-My Lord,. shall I furnish
you with this copy, which I think is correct. I
have checked it as you went on. [The copy is
handed to the judge].
The JUDGE :-This is in ink.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Perhaps my Lord, it may
have nothing to do with this transaction.
Mr. HILDYARD :-It is a copy of the notes
in pencil, found on Brooke.
Mr. WORTLEY:-My Lord, I beg leave to
band in this paper, found on Brooke, it is
merely to shew his connection with the meeting
of Chartist delegates.
The JUDGE Proceeds to read the paper:"National Charter Association Dr. To Robert
Brooke, as under.
To victoals, while at Manchester, as a] s. d.
delagate. August 16th.
f
One glass raspberry
.
Do. Dinner
Tea at Carpenter's Hall
Sdfper
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

0 2
0 10
1 0
0 5

Mr. O'CONNOR :-What is that ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-A Debtor and Creditor account, as I understand.
The JUDGE:---"A bottle of Pop 2d." It was
only some very small expenses.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-A current account, my
Lord.

143
The JUDGE :-" 17th, Bed-6d." It is only a
one sided account for victuals, &c.
Breakfast, Dinner and Supper,
and some other little things.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The object
of it is to confirm the statement against him,
that he was at Manchester, as a delegate, on
the 16th.
Mr. WORTLEY:-Was proceeding to examine
Mr. Eastwood, as to the mob seen at Todmorden, but the witness declined giving any evidence
in that respect, on the ground that he had been
in Court and heard the evidence; on the understanding that he would not be examined as to
any thing, except the papers he had to produce.
WILLIAM HEAP, examined by Sir GREGORY LEWIN:- Where do you live ? I live
at a place called Ingbottom, in the neighbourhood of Todmorden. On the 18th of August,
was there a meeting near Todmorden ? There was
a meeting on the 18th August last, at Basinstone,
about a mile from Todmorden. At what o'clock ?
About ten in the forenoon. What number of
persons were assembled there ? About 1,000. Do
you know a person named Robert Brooke ? Yes.
He resides in Todmorden ? Yes. Stone ? Yes.
Was he at that meeting ? Yes. Did he make a
make
Did
speech? Robert Brookewas speaing. when
arrived. He said hehad been at the delegate
meeting at Manchester; and, while there, there
came three letters from a man whose name he
would not tell. The first letter said he had 10,000
mento back him; the second said he had got 15,
and the third said he had got 30. Do you mean
30,000 ? Yes.-And he said they were gone to
Leeds, and had driven the barracks, and were
masters of the town at that minute. Brooke says,
"Now, my friends, we shall all stand firm. I
move that we never go to work any more till the
Mr. WORTLEY :- " The school-master's
abroad."
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:"Teaching the young idea how toshoot.""Perhaps some ofyou cannot do without working;
but I will tell you, you must go to the overseers;
and if those won't relieve you, we'll try some
means else." Brooke made a motion, that they
should meet that evening near the railway arches
at Todmorden.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Was that motion
seconded? Yes. There was another man made
a motion to go six abreast to Todmorden. Well,
now, on the same evening, did you attend another
meeting at Todmorden? Yes,about seven o'clock.
Was Brooke there ? Yes. He is a school-master
is he ? Yes.

morden in a quiet state? They were all unworking.
The JUDGE :-That is, they were not working ? Witness :-A great part of them.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Do you know
the valley between Todrmrden and Halifax?
Yes. Do you know anything of an assemblage
going down that valley? Yes. Do you know
where they came from ? One part came from
Burnley, and some from the Bacup-road.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Did you see them? Yes.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-In your judgment,
what is the
ed there? I can't say I ever saw so large a
bled there ? I can't say I ever saw so large a
number of
many thousands were there? Several. Were
many thousands were there ?

Several.

Were

the mills turned out ? They were turning them
out just then. This large assembly of persons
marched down the valley towards Halifax. Did
they ? Yes. You don't recollect the exact day?
No. Did that place continue in an excited state ?
Yes. You can't say how long? For a good many
days.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS :-Well, Mr.
Heap, what may you be when you are at home ?
I have been a farmer, and kept many horses and
cattle. You have been a farmer, pray what are
you now? Well, I kept a good many horses,
and cattle, and sheep. Are you a farmer now ?
No, my brother is one, he has taken the farm
now. Did you give up farming, or did it give
up ?-What were you doing in August last? I
was weeding stones. Where was the farmer
then ?-Were you carting? Yes. For yourself ?
No, but with my own horse and cart. For yourself? No, for the trustee of the Todmorden
turnpike road. What were you doing at the
meeting ? I was requested to go there by my
brother.

Who was he?

John Heap, the con-

stable of Todmorden. Why did he not go himself ? He wished me to go up, and see if there
was any disturbance, and let him know if there
was. So you went there ? Yes, I did. Did
you take any notes ? No. You carried all this
in your head for 5 or 6 months ? No, I bore it
in my mind till I got to Todmorden, and set it
down in Todmorden. Is it not from what you
remember, and not from what you set down, that
you now speak? No, I remember it, but I set
it down too. Well, were is your paper? Witness hands a paper, containing his notes, to Mr.
n as
Dundas.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The notes
that he does not refer to, you have no right to

Now, about this time, was Tod- call for.

144
Mr. DUNDAS returns the notes. Did he re- them up gave me one. ,Very well; have you
commend the people to be peaceable ? Yes. got one here ? [Witness produced a copy of the
Did not he say that several times ? Yes, I think " Executive Placard."] On what day did you
he mentioned it several times. They tell me get that ? On the 17th of August. At Todthat this fighting man is a lame man ? I have morden ? Yes. How far is that from Manchesseen people that walked better than him, whether ter? About twenty miles. Well, now, did you
he be lame or not. You have seen people that see a person. putting bills up of this description ?
walked better-well, that is the lowest descrip. I saw him put one up, and he had some more in
tion of a walker I ever heard. Is he lame? I his hand. How many ? About three.
The JUDGE :-What time of the day did you
cannot tell whether he brought it into this world,
or how it is. But whether or not, he walks with see him ? After dinner.
Mr. DUNDAS :-What is the Todmorden
-a crutch sometimes ? He does, and sometimes
he does not. But do people, who are not lame, dinner hour ? About two o'clock.
The next witness sworn was JAMES WILwalk with crutches ? Yes, I do myself, sometimes. For pleasure ? Yes, I take a stick when COX, the person whom, it was understood,'Mr.
I go out after the sheep. But what is your fun O'Connor consented to receive as a substitute for
about using a crutch ? Well, we call it a crutch Sir James GRAHAM. The Judge suggested,
sometimes, and sometimes a stick. But, when that, as the examination might occupy a great
I asked you whether the schoolmaster was a lame length of time, and as he did not like to break
man, and walked with a crutch, (lid you under- off in the middle of it, he thought it better, acstand me to mean the same thing as when you cording to previous arrangement, to let the jury
go out with a stick after the sheep-? Well, I go leave Court in time to depart by the train, at
out with a crutch sometimes. As a lame man? half-past five o'clock. However, both the 'AtWell, he does not go out well howsomdever. But torney-General and Mr. O'Connor said they
does not he go out with a crutch sometimes ? should not occupy much time in examining this
lHe does, and sometimes he does not. Then he witness.
JAMES WILCOX examined by the ATTORhas not a crutch ? Well, I never saw a man that
way, whether he came so'into the world or not. NEY-GENERAL :-Where do you live? At
Is he lame of a leg? Well, they are both lame; Ashton-under-Lyne. Do you remember a meetI should say they are both alike. Is he lame, or ing at Ashton, near Thacker's foundry-yard?
not ? He appears lame. Well, why not say that ? Witness :-At what time, sir ?
I said so before.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-In August.
LCross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-You Witness :-What date ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-That is what
have spoken of the magnitude of the procession;
now, tell us howlfar do you live from Todmor- I want to ask you.-Do you remember taking
den ? Two miles. During last summer, before any candles to a Chartist news-room ? I rethe strike, have you seen large processions in member there being'a meeting, but I was nt at
Todmorden ? Sometimes. Is not Todmorden a it. Can you fix the date when you went with
celebrated place for having large processions ? the candles? It was a night or two after that
Sometimes there are large processions in it. took place.
The JUDGE :-When did you take the canNow, sir, I ask you, on your oath, do not you
know that Brooke, in consequence of his misfor- dles ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The meeting
tune, became a schoolmaster, in order that he
might have a sedentary occupation? I said so. was a day or two after the candles, and the
No, you did not.
candles were a day or two after the meeting!
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :--He said so.
The JUDGE:-What day of the week was
Mr. O'CONNOR:-No: he said he walked as it ? Witness :-The strike took place on the 8th
of August, and this would be-\ the Tuesday or
well with one leg as with the other.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-He said theyr Wednesday prior to the 8t*.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-It would be
were both bad.
JOHN HEAP, recalled and examined by the the 2nd or 3rd of August ? Yes.-The meeting
ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Did you see any of fof Thacker's foundry, don't you want to know?
-the Executive Addresses at Todmorden ? I did. . -Well, that would be about the time. Well,
Did "you take one down? A person posting for some reason or other, you went with the

145
candles yourself? Yes. Where did you take the
candles to ? To the Chartist news-room. Where
was that ? In Charles Town. Is that a tart of
Ashton ? Yes. Did you find that any part of
the room was parted off ?
The JUDGE:-Charles Town is part of Ashton ? Yes, sir.
Th ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Did you find
any part of the room separated from the rest ?
Yes. What was it done with? Pack-sheeting.
Did you see any person you know sitting in that
room ?
The JUDGE :-Parted off with what? With
cotton bags, boards, &c., so as to make two
rooms ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-How many
people did you find there ? I can't say, but I
should think there were upwards of twenty.
Did you know any of them? I knew Richard
Pilling. What station did he occupy? I don't
know whether he was chairman or not, but it
appeared he was, from the way in which the
people spoke to him-They addressed him as
chairman.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Addressed who? Pilling.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Did you hear
what they were talking about ? They were talking about the heading of a placard. What did
Pilling say? He said it should be headed with
" The reckoning day is nigh;" or, " The reckoning day is at hand." Did you afterwards see
any placard of that kind posted through the
town? Yes. Well, now, did you read it? I
only read the heading; I can't read except I put
my glasses on; I could read, the heading distinctly, but nothing more. Was the placard in
many places, or in a few only ? I saw it in two
places. Now, let us know what you recollect
seeing as heading of a placard ? "The reckoning
day is nigh;" or, " The reckoning day is at
hand;" or, " near," or, words to that effect.
Did you afterwards hear Pilling say anything
about that Placard? I was in the room a day or
two afterwards, and I heard Pilling say he would
send twenty-five of them, I think, to Manchester.
Was there anybody else in the room you know
besides Pilling,? I knew one or two. Did you
knew a person of the name of Storah ? I know
a person who challenged me with saying, that I
saw the Anti-corn-law League paying the delegates. I said I knew nothing of the kind, but
that a person of the name of Hunt told me so;
and he then said, " I was at the back of the

boards." But you have no recollection of his
being there ? No, I have not.
Cross-examined by Mr O'CONNOR:-I believe, Mr. Wilcox, during the whole time of
these disturbances, you were very uneasy in your
mind ? Yes, sir. Did you ever attend any of
the meetings of shopkeepers ? Yes, I did. Did
you ever attend any other meetings ? Yes I did;
two or three others. Any of the corn-law
League? Witness :-When ?
Mr. Q'CONNOR :-On or about that t re.
Witness:-I did not.
Mr O'CONNOR :-Did you ever complain,
that the working people were unfairly got out of
their work, and that then the parties who got
them out turned against them ? Yes. You are a
shopkeeper I believe at Ashton? Yes. Did you
think that the treatment received by the turn-outs
was so bad, that it was your duty to make a
representation of it to the government? Yes, I
did. Had you heard from any of the manufac..
turers, Mr. Wilcox, previously to the turn-out,
that there were to be three reductions of wages
before Christmas ? Not from the manufacturers
themselves.
Was it a prevailing report in
Ashtqn ? It was a prevailing report. Who toldc
you this ? It was a certain gentleman who had
a correspondence, and he was a member of their
news-room. Whose news-room? The corn-law
League news-room he told me. What did you
M;
hear from him ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-No, really;
I must interpose. My Lord do you think this an
important thing.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, we are charged
here with conspiring together fora certainperiod;
and, being charged with conspiracy, I submit
that it is the Attorney-General's duty to show
who originated that conspiracy. The third and
fourth counts charge us with having continued a
conspiracy then in existence. I ,am now about
to show who were the originators of this conspiracy; and I think, upon the law of presumption, that this is fair to give evidence of, at this
time.
The JUDGE :-You are asking him what a
certain person, who was a member of the newsroom, told him with regard to the manufacturers
in the neighbourhood. And it was to that I
understood the objection to apply.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: --- I must
object, my Lord, to the mere understanding of
this witness, as derived from no authentic source.
I shall object now as being wholly irrelevant;

146
and ifderived from some personwith whom he had
any communication, still I must object to that.
The JUDGE :-I don't know that is strictly
evidence, but statements have been received
several times as to what was the prevailing notion
among the workmen.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-That was the question I
put to him, my Lord. "What was the prevailinig notion among the workmen at the time ?"
They understood that there were two or three
reductions to be made before Christmas.
The JUDGE :-It must not be taken that I
lay this down as a rule.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Precisely, my Lord, and
this is the Attorney-General's own witness.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-That does
not vary the rules of evidence.
Mr. O'CONNOR - [To witness.] - Now,
did you complain yourself that it was a conspiracy against the Chartists! - Witness: -To
whom ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Did you complain that
it was a conspiracy got up by other parties to
injure the Chartists, and further the agitation for
a repeal of the corn laws? I cannot say that I
ever mentioned it in that way. In what way did
you mention it ?-Tell us what your own opinion
was. My opinion was, that there were parties
in Ashton, that were desirous to bring ab6ut a
tumult, in order to stop the Chartists from having their meetings. What party in Ashton did
you attribute that to ?
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL: - Why,
really, my LordThe JUDGE :--Why, Mr. Attorney, I think
that is just as good evidence as the other.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL (emphatically) ;-1 cordially assent to that, my Lord,
that it is just as good.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-As good as Brooke having both legs lame!
The JUDGE :-(To the witness.) If you
understand the fact, we may as well have it at
once. You mean to say the Anti-corn-law
League? Yes, and I will give you my reasons.The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-We don't
want your reasons, but your facts.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Surely you don't object
to a man giving his reasons for what he does.
Witness:-I was in company with a certain
gentleman, and he told me ;-Observe, I'll tell
you what was the reason that brought me into
his company, he told me there woild be three
reductions between that and Christmas; and
that the Chartist Institution would be broke up,
and there would then be nothing but the Cornlaw League and the Tories; and, he says to me,
" Which of these two parties will you take ?"

Mr. O'CONNOR :-Now, how long have
you resided in Ashton ? I have been five years
in the parish, and before then, ten- or eleven
years. Did you see, during the strike or disturbance at Ashton, one Chartist hand-bill
posted on the walls; a bill; a placard; did you
see one? I saw these papers regarding the reckoning day. Nothing more than that ? And that
was after the people were turned out? No, not
after they were turned out. They were just
out about Stalybridge. It was a week before the
strike. I believe they were out the very day
that I saw the papers up. Now, Mr. Wilcox,
you spoke of the Charlestown meeting-room.
Have you frequently attended public meetings in
Ashton? I have sometimes. I believe you and
I never met till now? O yes; I once spoke to
you. Then that is more than I know. I have
not the pleasure of recollecting you. Witness :-No more than shaking hands with you,
and asking how you did. You have heard me
often address the people? I have heard you
speak twice. Upon those two occasions, did
you think my addresses calculated to preserve
the peace, or to lead to a disturbance ? They
were not calculated to lead to a disturbance.
Do you not think, that those addresses, or any
address that you ever heard me make,-did
you ever hear me say one single word calculated
to lead to a violation of the peace? Never, not
a word. Have you not heard me frequeritly discountenancing every thing like violence and
physical force ? I frequently read your paper,
the Northern Star; and I always found that
your advice was to keep the peace, and to take
care that tbpy were not led into any snare or trap.
And my speeches were of the same tendency ?
Yes. You spoke of your desire to go and see the
authorities in London, in consequence of the
manner in which the people were treated, and to
represent the entire to Sir James Graham? Yes.
Did you go to London? I went as far as Birmingham, on my way to London. There I wrote
a letter to Sir James Graham, telling himThe ATTORNEY,.GENERAL: - That we
muqt not have.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Telling him what? Surely
we may have a letter written by the witness for
the Crown.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-No, no; you
cannot have that.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Does not your Lordship
think that a letter written by the witness himselfThe JUDGE :-No, you cannot have the cor.
respondence.

147
Mr. O'NNOR:-Then you did not see Sir
James Graham ? No. Or Sir Robert Peel? No.
Then, when you got to Birmingham, you turned
back ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My lord, I
will.'say this, that, if Mr. O'Connor had been entitled to ask Sir James Graham to state the contents of that letter, or to produce it under a
duces tecum, then I would have no objection to
have it produced, but I wish Mr. O'Connor to
be in: same situation as if Sir James Graham
the
were standing here in court, to answer his questions.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-As a privy councillor, I
don't think I could ask him.
The JUDGE :-Just so and if Sir James
Graham, on being asked for that letter, were to
say, " I received this letter in my official character, and I think it not for the public interest,
that I should produce it," that would have been
sufficient to shut it out. Suppose, Mr. O'Connor, you had said to Sir James Graham, "Poduce that letter," and he replied, "No, I will
not; I received it in my official character as
Secretary of State, and I think it would be injurious to the public interest to produce it."
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I quite see the nature
of your objection, and, therefore, I shall not
press for the production of the letter.
WITNESS (cross-examined by BERNARD
M'CARTNEY) :-Did you ever hear, in the
course of your residence in Ashton, other
speakers, who possessed some degree of influence, recommending the people to peace, as well
as Mr. O'Connor, and to abstain from violence
and obey the law? Yes. Their addresses were
generally of that character and tendency ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-Does any other defendant
wish to ask a question?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-No, my Lord.
SAMUEL HIGHLEY, examined by Mr.
HIGHLEY:-You are a cotton-spinner, having
a mill at Glossop, I believe? Yes. Brookfield,
I believe, is the name of the place ? Yes. On
the 10th of August last were your hands turned
out by the mob? They were. Were your
works, in consequence, stopped for some time ?
Yes; from the 10th to the 26th. On the 26th,
did your men resume labour ? They commenced
at the usual time in themorning. At half-past
twelve that day, did any persons assemble round
your mill? Yes; a mob came down the road,
from Glossop; perhaps there were 600 or 700.
The JUDGE :-There is no cross-examination
about that. Rhodes was examined to the same
thing.

Mr. HILDYARD:- Between the 26th and
30th of August were there ineffectual attempts
made by the mob to turn out your hands?
There were threats used, but no attempts made
from the 28th to the 30th. They were not
turned out on the 26th. On Tuesday, the 30th
of August, early in the morning, did four or five
men say anything to you? A little past five
o'clock there came five men up and said "We
shall have plenty of company to-day, they a e
coming to level the premises and the factory.'
Did he state where the persons would come
from ? From the neighbourhood of Ashton, at
Staleybridge. During that morning, did a party
of men approach from that direction2 Yes ;
about eleven or twelve o'clock. Were they
armed with anything ? With large sticks. Had
you, in consequence of the threat made to you
that morning, sent to the soldiers at Glossop ?
I had, an hour before. After the mob had assembled round your works, did you assent to
them that these men should disperse? When
the mob came running down, making a most
dreadful noise, (there were many thousands
there at the time), I charged them not to
approach. Did you retire to your mill? Yes;
after they began to throw stones. After you
had done so, was an attack commenced on your
mill? The attack was commenced before. After
you retired, did they continue that attack upon
your mill? Yes. Were the windows of your
mill broke?. Yes; the principal part of the windows of my warehouse and house were brokewindow-frames and all. I belidve you had part
of your family in the house at the time ? Yes.
I believe you had two daughters in the house ?
Yes. Did the mob attempt to fbrce the doors
or get into your mill-yard? Yes;. they attempted to force the doors. I believe, in the
end, you found it necessary to fire on the mob ?
I threatened them repeatedly before; and, at
last, I had to fire on them. I fired a doublebarrell gun, and it missed : I instantly got another double-barrell gun, and before I could fire
it, six of the hands got hold of it. I fired it,
however, and likewise a pistol. The moment
the pistol went off, the noise ceased, and we
looked out directly, and the mob were running
down the road.
Mr. 'O'CONNOR :-If I don't mistake, Mr.
Rhodes, who was examined here, is ~rour son-inlaw ? He is. And he has part of your mills ?
Yes. The transaction you speak of occurred on
the 30th of August last? 'Yes. Did you apply

148
to the magistrates for aid ? Yes. An hour and a
half before the attack, I sent my son up with information to the magistrates of what I expected
to take place. -The mobbwere then nearly two
miles from my plade. The magistrates sent
back to say, "Whether there was a real attack or
not" ? Did you apply to Mr. Coppock, the magistrates' clerk at Stockport, for aid? No. Did
the magistrates tell you, that you could have no
aid, and they saw no reason why you should resist? No. Now, at this time, was there at
Glossop-dale, a meeting announced to be held ?
I am not aware. Does your mill front the road?
It does. And would the crowd have to pass
your mill on their way to Glossop-dale ? There
was no meeting that day in Glossop. Are you
sure of that ? I am sure of it. You will swear
there was no meeting there? I am positive of it.
Well, you fired three shots? Yes. No mischief
done to you ? I was struck on my shoulder and
breast before that. When the last shot was fired
they ran off? Yes.
Re-examined by Mr. HILDYARD:--I believe one of the constables was struck in the
face.? Yes. And two teeth knocked out of him ?
Yes.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Perhaps, my Lord, the
jury might now be discharged in order that
they might have sufficient time to meet the train ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-The jury
know at what time it is necessary for them to
leave, so as to have the advantage of the train.
Your Lordship's indulgence would be wasted if
they were not to have the advantage of the train.
Mr. WOTLEY :-We have two witnesses:
to examine, and .they will occupy a very short
time, indeed.
The JUDGE :---Ialf past four is the time.
HENRY LEES, examined by Mr. WORTiEY :--Do you know., the defendant, John
No.
Lewis .? Yes.. Have you seen him write
Have you received any letters from him ? I have
received papers from him; I seen them signed
by him; I have had business-transactions with
him, and I know his signature.. What is the
nature of the papers? :-ie is 'secretary for a
funeral societyand I am the treasurer, and have
paid money upoL order, signed by him. And
settled the accounts with him after,?
The JUDGE :--Did you ever settle he accouint
with him afterwards ? Witness :-I cannot speak
to that. You received orders sent by him , to
pay the money, and you afterwards told him
you did ? Yes., and I have sometimes paid it into
his hands.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Where does Lewis live?
At Wooley bridge, near Glossop. Now look at

that, [handing a paper to witness] * that his
signature? Yes.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL :-Is John
Lewis here? [Lewis was not in court when
called, so that the witness could not identify
him].
The JUDGE :-We must take care that we
do not take evidence against him, unless we can
identify him. This is John Lewis of Wooley
bridge. Who is the John Lewis that is indited ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-John Leach of Manchester.
Mr: HILDYARD :-Where is Wooley bridge?
Oh, it is on the borders of Derbyshire, near
Glossop, where John Lewis addressed a meeting.
The JUDGE :-Who proved that?
Mr. HILDYARD :-John [Joe] Coopex, wfis
was called in the afternoon of yesterday.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-If it was proved that I
was addressing a meeting at Glasgow, that
would be no proof that I resided there.
Mr. MURPHY :-Lewis was a speaker at a
meeting at Glossop. Joe Cooper, says, " I live
at Chisworth, &c.." and then goes on to speak
of Lewis being at a meeting near Glossop.
The JUDGE :-" I live at Chisworth, near
Glossop." That is go.
SMr. ATHERTON :-This is an attempt to
prove an admission, on a very distinct ground, in
the res gestce.
Mr. WORTLEY: -- Well, I ill carry it a
little further. I will satisfy the jury thatit is
stilithesame person -it imay not afford complete certainty, but it will be reasonable evidence.
ROBERT NEWTON, examined by Mr.
WORTLEY.:-What are: you? Deputy-Constable of- Ashton-under-Lyne. 'Do you :know
John Lewis? I apprehended him. Where does
he live ? At Wooley Bridge.
The JUDGE :-You apprehended him on a
charge connected with these disturbances ? 1
did, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-Was he kept in custody,
or let out on bail ? I sent him ff to Glossop,
and gave him up to the authorities there, and he
was afterwards let oat on bail.
The JUDGE : -Have you ever seen hinm.
since? I have.
Mr. DUNDAS':-Are there any other Lewis's
of Wooley Bridge? Not that I am aware of, I
have not been there, but he told me himself
that he lived there.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, and we object to
that, we still say it is Inot proved that there is

149
no other such person at Woolley Bridge. [To then put in and read by the officer of the
the Witness.] It is a large place? Not very court:-" Manchester, 16th of August, 1842.
large. It is a manufacturing place? There is a
To the Committee meeting at Glossop:-I
manufactory near, but it is not a large place.
have the pleasure to inform you that, at a meetHow many hands in the factory? I don't know,
ing of the different trades assembled this mornbut I think not many.
ing at ten o'clock, in the Hall of Science, Camp.
The JUDGE :-The John Lewis of Woolley field, it took all the day
for the different
Bridge, the defendant, was at the head of this delegates to state the feelings of the constituencies
party, and afterwards let out on bail ?
they represented. I can assure you, the people
Mr. WORTLEY :-And Woolley Bridge is of Glossop, and the surrounding hamlets, that
near Glossop ? Yes.
the delegates assembled there, calmly and coolly
Mr.WORTLEY :-Now, my Lord, we have discussed which was the best remedy for the precalled a man to show that John Lewis lived at sent state in which the country is now engaged,
Woolley Bridge, and that Woolley Bridge is near and at the last, a majority of the meeting was, that
Glossop. The witness who proves the hand- all cease from their work till the Peoples' Charter become the law of the land, and further, the
writing says, he knows John Lewis of Woolley
meeting is this evening adjourned till to morrow
Bridge.
morning, when some measures will be adopted,
The JUDGE :-The former witness said, " He as to the means whereby the
above resolution
lived at Woolley Bridge, arid that there was only can be carried out. Now, ye men of Glossop,
one John Lewis.
and its vicinity, I implore you, as an individual, to
Mr. DUNDAS :-This witness does not pre- stand here to a man. Let 'peace, law and order,'
tend to say, there is only one John Lewis.
by your motto, if you only do so, depend upot
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-No, my Lord, it victory is yours; you must also exert your.
selves in .collecting from the well disposed,
but he does not know more.
The JUDGE :-There is only one John Lewis money or any commodity they may think
proper to give, to be distributed among the poorthere.
est among you.
you
Mr. DUNDAS :- [To witness] -Will
I remain your's, in haste,
swear there is not another John Lewis ?
I
JOHN LEWIS.
don't know of any. Will you swear there is
P. S. Do your duty, and I promise you to do
not ? I don't know any other there. You are mine, let the consequences be what they may.sure ? Well, I am an old inhabitant there. Is
John Lewis.
there any other John Lewis there ?-Aye or no ?
To the Committee, at Glossop."
Sherwood Inn, Tibb-street,
Well, I don't know any other.
Manchester, August 19th, 1842."
The JUDGE :-Do you know the place well?
Mr. WORTLEY :-Perhaps we shall hear
Yes.
more of that locality, Sherwood Inn, Tib-street,
The JUDGE :-Well, that will do, I think.
bye.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Is he bye and
The OFFICER proceeds :a man of good character ? Yes, he was secre"To the Committee of Glossop and Mottram:tary and treasurer.
This is to inform you that we, the Executive
Mr. WORTLEY :-I think, my Lord, that is Committee, are at our post, determined to do our
enough, but I can go further.
duty if we only get public support. You must be
The JUDGE :-Well, I have no objection; I aware that though we was elected by the trades'
am open to observation.
delegate meeting, it is not in our power to carry
the resolution of last Tuesday into effect without
THOMAS RHODES, re-called.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Have you been in Court. being backed out by public opinion and public
support. I have also to inform you, that we
Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-He was examined before. called a public meeting of the shopkeepers of
this day, at two o'clock
[To the witness]-Do you know John Lewis, of Manchester and Salford,
in the afternoon, at Carpenters' Hall, to see how
Woolley Bridge, near Glossop ? Yes. Do you
far they are agreed to assist the people in obtainknow him well? Yes. Is there any other John
ing their political rights. I can assure you, that
Lewis there? No, hlieacknowledged to me last there was a great spirit manifested by some of the
August that he was a delegate at Manchester, shopkeepers, trades, and people, and one Mr.
and there voted for the Charter.
O'Neal made an excellent speech, which you will
The following letters from John Lewis, were see in the Manchester p'pers, as there was two
a

150
reporters.-The first resolution was, " That a
requisition be drawn up and presented to the
Mayor for him to convene a public meeting, to
be held, as soon as possible, of ihe shopkeepers
and tradesmen of Manchester and Salford."
'The second resolution was, " That, should the
'Mayor refuse to do so, they themselves would
immediately convene one without delay. I'have
also to inform you, that James Leach has been
brought up to day, but for want of sufficient
evidence, he is remanded till Tuesday next,
and in order that you may see the necessity of
standing true like men, I can inform you that,
should a failure take place, Feargus O'Connor,
and every one, both of the Executive, and the
leaders of the Chartist movement, will become
victorious in the land of those who seeks to keep
from the people their political rights.-Oh ! that
Englishmen and Englishwomen had but the
spirit of Irishmen and Irishwomen, there would
not be the least doubt of success. I have to at-

END

OF

tend a meeting of the four mechanicaltrades which
will be held this evening in Carpenters' Hall,
and the Executive meets early to morrow morning; and at ten o'clock, a public delegate meeting
will be held in the Charter association room,
Brown-street, Travis-street, Manc!ester. You
had better convene a public meeting at six o'clock,
on Monday morning, we shall then be prepared
to lay before you all the information we are in
possession of. It is expected, that theie will be
reports in to-morrow's papers, shewing what
state the country is in. The power loom weavers
of Manchester, has come to the determination, if
their political rights are not obtained, they will
not resume work again, until they have the wages
they had in 1839, and issued a list of prices they
1had in that year.

OURTH

I remain, your's,
In the cause of Political Freedom,
JOHN LEWIS."
The Court rose at a quarter to five.

DAY

S

TRIAL,

TRIAL OF FEARGUS

O'CONNOR, ESQ.,

AND OTHERS.

FIFTH

DAY,

Monday, 3March 6th, 1843.

Mr. BARON ROLFE took his seat this morning at the usual hour.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, I wish to make an observation in reference to a
violation of the rule laid down by your Lordship, respecting the keeping of witnesses
out of Court. I do not intend to bring the matter formally before your Lordship,
but I wish to take an opinion on it. Your Lordship made a rule that all the witnesses should leave the Court, and, I take it, that that rule was intended for the
protection of the parties concerned; and that nothing should be done to interfere
with it. Now, my Lord, I am prepared to show that, invariably, half an hour
before the witnesses are brought into Court to be examined, a Mr. Irwin, whose
name appears frequently in this cause, gets possession beforehand of the person
who is to give evidence, and, having examined him, then instructs the witness about
to be called. I wish now, my Lord, to give notice that it is my intention to prefer
a charge of subornation of perjury against one of the parties. I know, my Lord,
I cannot now bring the matter formally bef'ore the Court.
The JUDGE:-Really it is seldom that the turning of witnesses out of Court
is productive of any good. I cannot prevent them from communicating with one
another.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I wish the matter were brought
formally before your Lordship. It is quite competent for your Lordship to send for
that man, and ask him if he has done what Mr. O'Connor alleges. If your Lordship sees no objection, I would implore your Lordship, that this may not go to the
public without denial. I believe there is not a syllable of foundation for it.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I can prove it.
The JUDGE :-I cannot do that. It must not be taken to be either the one way
or the other. We have ample enough on our hands, without trying collateral questions as to subornation of perjury. It must not be taken, because I say that,
that I would give the least countenance to any such conduct.
Mr. WORTLEY :-I handed in a paper to your Lordship, and you handed it
to Mr. Forrest. The endorsement is proved to be in the handwriting of one of
the defendants.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-1I shall reserve that, my Lord, until I call a
witness.
The JUDGE:-I recollect, it is a writing of which I said I should take the charge.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Then, my Lord, we won't read it till it is
correctly in your Lordship's note.

152
EDWIN SHEPHERD examined by Mr.
'WORTLEY :-I believe you are Superintendant
of police for the Blackburn lower division ? Yes.
Were you in the performance of your duty, in
Auigust last ? Yes, sir. On the li5th of August,
were you called out to quell any disturbances ?

is not what we want." Anything more? Yes:" We want to go quietly into the town to turnout the hands, until we get a fair day's wages
for a fair day's work." What did the magistrates
do ? They endeavoured to persuade them to leave
the town as they were strangers, and to go away

across the turnpike road? Yes. Was the mob
coming up the turnpike road? Yes. In what
order? In no order at all; they were coming

did you see when you got there? We saw a
party of the mob returning from the millgates, and a party of the work-people headed

in a body, and there were four men in advance of the rest. Is there a toll-bar there ?
There is. When the mob came in view of the
mnilitary; were they coming along the road

by Mr. Hopwood, Junr. following them out of
the gates. Did you find whether any mischief
was done at Hopwood's mill? Yes, the windows
of the lodge and counting-house were broken, and

Yes, Sir. What was the nature of those distur- peaceably and quietly, for that all their endeabances ? An attack upon a mill. Upon whose yours would be resisted. Did they go home, or
mill? Rodgett's and Brierley's factory. What what did they do? They would not go home.
time of the day was that ? About eleven o'clock. 'Then, what did they do ? We endeavomed to
WVhen you got there, what did you find . Ifound take some of the ringleaders into custody. Did
ia
arty of from 200 to 300 scaling the gates.
you see what became of those four men in front ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Mr. Wortley, what date ? We did not. What did you do then? When we
Mr. WORTLEY:-The 15th of August.
went to call those four men forward they disap.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-At Blackburn ?
peared. Did you succeed in taking some ? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY; -Blackburn.
[To wit- How many ? About forty. But how many did
ness.] What distance is Blackburn from Man- you take at that moment? About five or six.
chester? Blackburn is fifteen miles to the north What became of the rest of the mob ? They diswest. Was there any else beside scaling over persed. In what direction ? Towards the
the gates ? Yes, they were knocking against the town, and over the fields. What number of
gates with their clubs. What did you do? I persons do you think you saw getting into the
ordered my own men forward, and we took seve- town across the fields ? The great majority of
ral the mob into custody. What became of them. Now, what did the police and military
of
the military? They drew up to the end of the do ? They returned to the town with the pristreet, near the turnpike road, and we went down soners which they had taken. Did you come to
the street to the gates. What became .of the Ia mill belonging to Mr. Eccles ? Yes. What
.mob who were attacking the mill? We took a did you see when you got there ? A great numa great portion of them into custody. Later in her of persons in front of the mill in the street;
the day, did you see another mob ? Yes, about I went down and saw one of the overlookers out.
two hours after. What size was that mob ? There side of the gate.
The JUDGE :-Was there a great mob in
were from 300 to 1500 or 2000 persons in it.
-How
much later in the day was it? About two front of it ? Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY : -Were the police with
hours later. Had the military remained there?
'When that mob approached, the military drew you ? No, only myself and Mr. Hornby, a magitup from the head of the street. They had been trate. I believe the mob moved on then? Yes.
at the head of the street ? Yes. Under arms ? Did you afterwards go with the magistrates and
Yes, under arms. You say the military drew military, to Mr. Hopwood's mill? Yes. What

towards the turnpike ? Yes, I was with the mili- the gates also were much indented with stones.
tary, and a magistrate was present. From what
road where the mob coming ? From the Hasling-

On the following day did the mob come ? Yes.
From what direction? The same direction.

dea or the Accrington road. From the direction
of Burnley ? Yes. As far as you could see of
them, were they Blackburn people or strangers ?
They were strangers ? Now, did one of the four
who came in front, speak ? He did. What pas-

What number was there ? I think there were,
(taking into account the number dispersed over
the fields), more than there were the day before.
Did you take some of them into custody? Yes,
(assisted by the military), about sixty. Then

sed ? He said, when he got near to us, addressing you took forty the first day and sixty the second ?

the authorities :-"Now chaps, how is it to be ?" Yes. When were the mills turned out at BlackThat was addressed to the authorities, was it? burn? Chiefly on the 15th and 16th. Did you
It was;-'" Are we to go quietly or not, be- see in Blackburn that placard, [handing a pla-

cause if not, we will do so by force."

Did some card to the witness] circulated or stuck up ? Not

of the others dissent from that? They did. What stuck up, sir, I saw it in the hands of several
did they say ? They said .- " Hush, hush, that persons.

1503
Mr. WORTLEY :-This, my Lord, is the
Executive Placard in a small shape.
Mr. MURPHY :-You saw it on the 15th ?
WITNESS:-No, about the latter end of that
week.
Mr. MURPHY :-That would be about the
Saturday ? Yes. That would be about the 23rd ?
Yes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-[Handing the placard up
to the Court.] This is the same as that we had
before, my Lord, with the addition of one word.
In the original it is:-" Englishmen ! the blood
of your brethren reddens the streets of Preston
and Blackburn, and the murderers thirst for
more." In this the word,-" Halifax" is added.
which is the only difference I can detect. The
passage thus reads:-" Englishmen ! the blood
of your brethren reddens the streets of Preston,
[To the witness.]
Blackburn, and Halifax."
Did you take a person name Gibson ? Yes. Who
is he ? The secretary to the Chartist association.
Did you find one of them on him ? Yes.
Mr. DUNDAS:-He is not a defendant. I
don't ask the witne§s any questions.
WILLIAM GRIFF1N was then called, and
the officer of the Court was about to administer
to him the oath, when,
Mr. ATHERTON interposed.-Don't swear
him yet. Griffin, do you believe in the existence
of a Supreme Being ? Yes, sir. And in a future
state of rewards and punishments ? Yes, sir.
WILLIAM GRIFFIN was then sworn and
examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:Where have you lived for the last six or eight
months ? In Manchester. MWhere did you live in
August last ? In Manchester. What was your occupation? A reporter. Who were you chiefly employed by before that time ? In my original trade, sir.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : - No, on
what newspaper were you employed ? On the
Northern Star. Did you report for the Courts
of Law? I reported for the Northern Star the
political movement of the country.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-The political movement
of the country, my Lord!
The JUDGE:-ou reported as to the political movement of the country ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Were you
present at a meeting of delegates in conference at
Manchester? Yes, sir. On what day? On the
17th of August.
The JUDGE:-At Scholefield's Chapel? Yes,
my Lord.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:- I don't
know whether you was personally acquainted
with any of the people there ? Yes, sir. With
whom ? With most of the parties who were there.
Then, perhaps, you will tell me, as far as you
can recollect, who wece there ?-Did you make

any note of it ? I did not take their names down
Was Scholefield there? He was there, but not as
a delegate. Was he in and out many times during
the meeting? Yes, sir. Was Mr. O'Connor
there ? Yes, sir. Was Peter Murray M'Douall
there? Yes, sir. Was 3airstow there? Yes,
Jonathan Bairstow. Was Leach there? Yes,
James Leach was there, and John Leach. Christopher Doyle
The JUDGE :-Was a person there whose
name was Arthur ? Yes, there was a person there
who called himself Arthur. The Rev. William
Hill, William Beesley, George Julian Harney,
Parkes, Otley, Railton, James Leach, John
Leach, David Morrisson, Arran, Cooper, the secretary, and a boy who called himself Ramsden,
who was a delegate from the youths, were there.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- I understand he represented the juvenile population ?
Yes, sir. About how old was Ramsden? I think
he was not more than eighteen.
The JUDGE:-Was John Campbell there?
Yes, and Hoyle, M'Cartney, Norman, two of
that name I believe came from Warrington,
Skevington, Brooke of Todmorden, and Mooney
from Colne were there. Do you remember any
others who were there ? I cannot say now.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I would
ask you was there any resolution proposed there ?
There was, sir. Who proposed it? Jonathan
Bairstow. Who seconded it? Feargus O'Connor.
Did you take a minute of the resolution? I did
not take a minute of the resolution, because I
expected to get it from the secretary. Did you
ever get it? I did, sir, in print, the following
morning. Have you that resolution ? Not in
my possession. I got a printed copy of it the
following morning from a person named Gabriel
Hargraves. Was that resolution ever published ?
Yes, in the Northern Star. Did you see it
shortly afterwards in the Northern Star? I
did; I read it on the 20th. Are youi able to say
that the statement in the Northern Star is a
correct copy of what you heard read at the meeting? I am, sir.
The JUDGE: - Does the Northern Star
come out once a week ? Yes. It was correctly
given there ? I believe it was, my Lord. I saw
no alteration whatever.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Was there
any amendment proposed? There were two;
one by Mr. Hill, and the other by Samuel Parkes.
What was Hill's amendment? I cannot exactly
remember the words; it was not to recommend
the strike; it amounted to a negative of the
resolution. Did you take any minute of that
amendment ? I did not, sir.
The JUDGE:-You took a minute of it? I
did not, sir.

154
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Is that the
paper that was handed about ?-[handing a paper
to witness.] This is the resolution proposed by
Jonathan Bairstow, and seconded by Feargus
O'Connor. Where did you get that? I got this
from Gabriel Hargraves. Who is he? A person
that lives in Brown-street.-A shoemaker who
lives in one of the Chartist rooms, Brown-street.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I doubt,
my Lord, whether that makes this paper evidence ?
only thought you were
The JUDGE :-I
mentioning it as showing what the resolution
was.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What were
the numbers on the division? Twenty-eight or
twenty-nine in favour of the original resolution,
and eight or nine against it.
Mr. MURPHY :-We have not this resolution
in evidence.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-You have
the substance of it.
Mr. MURPHY :-I just want a copy of it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-[To witness] -The resolution was carried? Yes. After
that, was there any proposal about the minority
being bound by the majority ?
Mr. MURPHY:-Oh! don't ask him that.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-What was
N
then done ? Yes, the minority was bound by the
majority. Did you take any notes ? Not a fullr
report, because they prohibited me from publishing anything, except the resolutions. I did not
ask you about full notes. Indeed, I don't want
notes at all. But have you anything that will
enable you to remember whether such a resolution was passed ?-1 am not asking you about
full notes, sir ? There was no resolution passed,
except what I told you. Well, was there any
resolution passed binding the minority to go with
the majority? Several speakers who bad voted
be bound by the
in the minority itsaid they would in the form of a
nmajor
ityut
was noput
resolution. I understood you to say that no
resolution was put binding the minority to go
with the majority ? No more than an agreement
-a general understanding.
The JUDGE:-What do you meanby a general
understanding ? It was mooted, and no one
objected to it. Was there any address proposed:?
Yes, sir. Did you take any note of it ? I did
not take a note of it. Why? Because I knew
I could not publish the speeches, and that I
would get the resolutions and addresses. Was
woul& get the emesolutions and-,addresses. Was
the address red ? It was. Did you afterwards
get. a copy of it e Yes, I wrote two copies of
the original address, which was put into my
hands by Mr. Feargus O'Connor.

Mr. O'CONNOR :-He is now speaking of
the address published in the Northern Star ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Yes.
The JUDGE :-It was in manuscript? Yes.
When was it put into your hands? On the same
day, the 17th of August, at the chapel.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--You were
saying something about William Hill? Yes, I
went with William Hill, and wrote two copies.
The JUDGE : - After the conference was
over ? Yes; I went to his hotel, and wrote two
copies; one of these copies was for the Northern
Star, and the other for the British Statesman.
Did you see a copy of the address afterwards in
the Northern Star? Yes, sir. Can you tell
me whether it was a true copy, as far as you can
judge, of the address carried at the meeting ? I
read it twice, and I saw no alteration. I think
you yourself took a copy of it ? I did, sir.
The JUDGE :-The copy in the Northern
Star is correct ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Do you know
Thomas Mahon? I can't say I do.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
that is all I ask the witness.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I don't ask him anything.
Cross-examined by Mr. BAINES :-I believe
you were employed on the Northern Star till

the beginning of June last ? Yes, Sir. And then,

for some reason I don't inquire into, you left
for some reason I don't inquire into, you left

that paper, and came over to Manchester?

I

did of my own accord. Well, I don't inquire
into that.
The JUDGE :When do you say he came ?
Mr. BAINES :-About the beginning of June,
my Lord. The precise time is not material.
He sent some communications afterwards, but
was regularly employed till the beginning of
June. Is not that so, Mr. Griffin ? About that
time; I can' tell exactly.
The JUDGE :-Well, some fewmonths before ?
Mr. BAINES :-We need not detain his Lordship and the Court by looking for the exact date.
Some short time before? Yes. You then came
over to Manchester? I was employed there.
Did you apply for relief and assistance to Mr.
Scholefield ? Not for relief; I wantedto borrow
5s. and he lent it me. However, you did apply
to him? Yes.
The JUDGE :-In a while after you were
employed on the Northern Star you applied to
Y
f
S
Scholefeld? Yes.
Mr. BAINES :-You were a painter, originally? Yes. And Mr. Scholefield employed you
to do something in that way in his chapel ? Hie

r
I

did, sir Now, after that, did you become se.
cretary to the Committee, which was formed for
the purpose of building and opening, on the 16th
of August, a monument to the memory of Henry
Hunt ? I did, sir. How soon was that, think
you, after coming to Manchester in the beginning of June? About a week or a fortnight.
I don't understand you about coming to Manchester, for I did not leave Manchester. How
soon was it, after you had applied to Scholefield,
and he had given you this job of painting ?
Somewhere about June. That you became
secretary to this committee ? Yes. Now, do you
remember yourself suggesting to Mr. Scholefield
the expediency of having a meeting of delegates,
for the purpose of their being present at the
opening of Hunt's monument ? I do. And was
it not another part of your suggestion, that the
delegates should also consider the differences
existing at that time among the leaders of the
Chartist body? It was. Was it another object
the delegates had in view to consider the reorganization of the Chartist body, and see if
there was anything in it illegal ? That was my
view. And you thought it right to communicate
that to him? Yes. No doubt your view was,
that there might be a review of the organization
of the Chartist body, to see if there was anything whatever illegal in it ? Yes.
Mr. BAINES:-Just so.
The JUDGE:-That is, if there was anything
illegal; I suppose with a view of altering it if
there was ?
WITNESS:-If found necessary.
Mr. BAINES :-I believe after you had so
communicated with Mr. Scholefield, the Hunt's
monument committee came to a resolution to
adopt your suggestion? They came to resolution
to meet and considel the suggestion. And I
suppose every means was taken, to make it extensively known that this would be done on the
16th of August? Yes. An address was issued
by the executive cemmittee, informing the
Chartist body throughout the country of the
meeting that was to take place? Yes, of the
conference.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-What conference ?
Mr. BAINES:-He has already told you.
[To witness.] How long did you continue to
act as secretary to the Hunt's monument committee? About six or seven weeks. Did you
continue to do so down to the 16th of August?
Yes. Now, before you go to what passed on

the 16th August, allow me to ask you a little
about Mr. Scholefield. He, I believe, is a Dis.
senting minister, is he not ? He is, sir. I believe he belongs to a sect called Bible Christians,
or, from the name Cowherd, their founder, Cowherdites? Yes, always, in my hearing, it was
Cowherdites. I believe he has long practised,
at all events as long as you have known him as
an apothecary? Yes, and I understood that
Cowherd did so before him. I understood him
to be a very moral and abstemious character.
I suppose he was before your time ? Yes. But
as long as you have known Mr. Scholefield he
was acting as Dissenting preacher and apothecary ? Yes. He has a chapel attached to his
house? Yes. And also a place called a surgery? Yes. That is part of the premises in
which he carries on his business as apothecary ?
Yes. He has also a burial-ground beside Everystreet, and this goes into another piece of burialground by an arch-way ? Yes. Is it on the
front burial-ground the monument to Henry
Hunt was erected? It is to the left of Mr.
Scholefield's house, as you stand this way, in front
of the street.
The JUDGE :-The burial ground? Yes.
Mr. BAINES :-Youknow that Mr. Scholefield
gave the ground for the purpose of erecting that
monument ? Yes, I understood so. Was the
monument ready for being opened on the 16th
August ? It was completed. Every effort, I
believe, had been made that it should be completed on that day? Yes, sir. Just another
word about Mr. Scholefield's premises ? Yes.
I believe there is a passage from his house,
through the chapel, to the back premises?
There is. And also from the surgery you could
go to the back premises ? We can go either
way to the chapel. So that if a person had
occasion to go from the house to the back premises he would go through the chapel ? Yes.
Now, do you know, that on the 16th August
Mr. Scholefield had a person of the name of
Brooke, painting, or doing something in the
back premises ? I don't know that -he had;
but he might have had him without my knowing it.
The JUDGE:-What do you mean by the
back premises?
Mr. BAINES .- My Lord, I have a sketch
here of it, but I don't wish to be troubling the
court with what, perhaps, is unnecessary. [To
witness.] I will ask you another question reEpecting this matter. You have stated, already,

that Mr. Schol-field did nt attend this meeting
as a delegate? He was not a delegate. Nor
was he one of the executive ? He was not one
of the executive. Did he sit there and take any
part in the proceedings? He did not. From
his passing and repassing do you believe that he
was attending to his ordinary avocations during
.he proceedings ? Sometimes I should think he
was.
The JUDGE :-Part of the time he was passing and repassing? Hle went out at one end, and
he returned through the chapel occasionally.
Mr. BAINES .- He did, but did not take
part in the proceedings ? He did not, except he
put a question as he passed. How long were
the delegates sitting in the chapel ? Many
hours, perhaps six or seven, it might be more
or less. When were you applied to, to give
Somewhere about
evidence on this subject?
you
the middle of September. Who applied to
on that subject? A police officer-inspector
Irwin.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY :-I have
a very few questions to ask you, Griffin. Were
you acquainted with Cartledge, who was examined here on Saturday? I know him, perhaps, two years and a-half, and better. Were
you ever employed together in literary composi-

saying,-not that he believed so then, bit, that
that is his opinion now. If he is required to contradict Cartledge, then the witness must be
asked, "whatis your opinion now ?" Not what
it was some other time. He can only be asked
what he said at some other time to contradict
himself.

The JUDGE :-Why it is a very weak contradiction. He now says he cannot tell. Whose
is it. [To the witness.] Did not you formerly
tell whose it was?
Mr. MURPHY :-Yes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :- hat he said was-" Being
pressed much, he said he believed it was Cartledge's."
Mr. MURPHY :-Now, do you mean to tell
me that any pressure would make you pledge your
belief to a thing which you knew to be false You thought it was false, but you pledged your
belief it was true, because a Barrister pressed
you ? No, I was asked, whose it was, and being
pressed, I said I believed it wasCartledge's. Who
was the first person that had a conversation with
you about giving evidence in this matter? Mr.
James Irwin. Was it shortly after the meeting
of this conference of delegates? It was in September. Where? At Mr. Brown's, Temperance Hotel. Were you living there? I was
lodging there. Had you sent an intimation to
Irwin, or did be come to you ? He did not come
to me, he sent a messenger. Was that in contions, or in reporting ? We were not employed sequence of an intimation you had given to give
together; we have written together. Are you evidence ? Not the least. Had you ever given
When where you
acquainted with his handwriting ? He writes a any such intimation ? No.
called upon to give evidence ? About a week
sloping hand, and likewise a straight hand. My
afterwards. Now, have you not been asking
question is, are you acquainted with the general
others to try and induce them to give evidence
am.
character of hishandwriting? I think I
as wetl? I have. You have been inducing othei's
Now, was it your good fortune to have seen the to give evidence as well? Yes. Had you never
draught of the "Executive had any difference with Mr. Feargus O'Connor ?
original manuscript
Address ?" I have not. Have you seen the Not in the least. Had you never any quarrel with
proof sheet of that address, with corrections on him about pecuniary matters ? No. Had you neit? I have seen what was called a proof ver any quarrel with him, because, in consequence
of your situation as'reporter, you were not giving
sheet.
Mr. MURPHY :-Just look at that, [handing that impulse to the Northern Star which you
the proof sheet to witness.] Now, whose hand- ought? Not in the least. You will swear that
having left
writing do you believe that to be in ? I can't you left voluntarily? Yes. Then,
was there no statement made, from
swear. * Did you never, on any occasion, swear voluntarily,
time to time, to other parties, as to your leaving?
any thing about it ? I did not. Did youever -Did you go away without informing tther
state your belief on it ? I did. I told the bar-. parties ?-What was your reason for leaving?
rister; but it was forced from me, but I was I gave him notice that I should leave, if he
not sure. Well, 1Ion't care whether it was would not tell me who the parties were that were
forced from you or not; but yoU once stated, to complaining: and he would not give me the
the best of your belief, that it was the hand. names. Then he was complaining ? He said so,
writing of Cartledge ?
but I have a contradiction to that in my pocket.
? In IreThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord, I Where were you living since that tjme
England ?
don't believe that is evidence. If that is meant to land..: What tiame did you return to
Ltast
it can only be b,the witniesss Sunday week. You have been with Irwin
contradict Cartledge,

157
since ? Yes.

What was your occupation in Ire-

land ? I was not following any profession. What
were your means of support? I was provided
for. Providedlfor by the Government? Not
that I know of. Well, by some police officer or
some person ? Irwin. Irwin-Well, what was
the allowance you had from him? No particular
allowance.. Well, what was the average they
paid you? Perhaps five shillings a week, or not
so much. Was that your sole subsistence while
there? No, sir. Was that your sole support
while there? No, sir. You paid no bills? Irwini
was responsible. Where were you living? I was
living at Armagh, Newry, Clones, and Warrenpoint. And all that time Irwin paid for you?
Yes. Go down, sir.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATIERTON :-You
spoke about Chartists, and stated that while in
Manchester, you were in the habit of mixing
with the people who called themselves Chartists ?
Yes. Did these people professedly associate
together for the purpose of bringing about some
political change ? They did. That was their
professed object? Yes. Now, will you state
what was the precise political change, which
they professed to have in view? The Charter.
Will you state what the professed doctrines of
the Charter were ? There are six points. Universal suffrage, vote by ballot, annual Parliament, no property qualification for members,
payment of wages to members, and electoral districts. Then these six propositions were the
political doctrines, which the Chartists professed
to be anxious to bring about, as the law of the
land ? They are. These they wished to bring
about only? Yes, as far as I was aware of. And
that meeting of the 17th August was given
notice of, that it should take place before the
commencement of the strike ? Yes. I think you
said, the professed object of that meeting was to
take measures as to Hunt's monument ? I did
not say that, I said my view was, I did not say
what their view was. But I think you say you
were mixing with those people, and on habits of
familiarity with them in Manchester, and from
that circumstance you are aware that this meeting, called a conference of delegates, was projected
some time before the strike commenced? It was.
W ere you aware, from the same source, of what
the professed object of that meeting wasI mean at the time it was first projected? I
cannot say what the professed object of the conference of delegates was, I know what my own
object was. You mean, the conference of delegates about iluit's monument ?-You sa- this

meeting was projected before the strike ? It was.
Well, do you know that the object of that meeting before the strike, was professed and generally
known ? It was. Well, what was it? To reconsider the plan of organization of the Chartist
to do away with difference among the
bodyleaders, and if there was any thing illegal in the
organization of the body to get rid of it. And
no other object that you know of was professed till the meeting took place? Not that I
know of.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :Griffin, I think you stated that you gave me notice that you would leave my office? I did. Now,
whether was it I that gave you notice, or you
that gave me notice ? I gave you notice. On
what occasion? I gave you notice at the Hall of
Science, at Manchester. Why? Because you
said that parties had made complaints. What
did I say that parties complained of ? You did
not say what. On one occasion, previous to my
addressing a meeting at the Hall of Science, did
I not tell you to be more particular in your reports, because complaints had been made of their
inaccuracy ? You said I was to report properly,
because parties had complained, but you would
not give me their names. Did I not say that
various complaints had been made to me by parties that you had made wrong reports of their
speeches?You said you were quite satisfied, and
had every confidence in me. That is one thing,
but was not that my reason for making the complaint ? You said that parties complained. Did
I desire you to be particular in the report you
were then taking ? es, but that was owing to
the disputes between the Anti-corn-law League
and the Chartists. Did I say that other parties
complained that you had not reported properly ?
Now, bring your mind to bear on the time when
you first gave information to Irwin.-When was
it? I can't tell to a day. Perhaps it would be
about the 12th or 14th of September. Can you
be three days out? I might be. Can you be
five
four ? I might be. Can you hbe days out? I
might be. Can you be six days out? I can't he
more, I think. Then it was between the 12th,
the earliest, and the 18th the latest? Yes, I
should think it was. Were you in any work at
that time ? I was reporting for the Evening Star.
How soon after Mr. Irwin first made the application to you did you give any information ?
Perhaps from four to five days. Did you consider yourself offended by the application being
made to you? I did at first. Why were you offended at first? Because Mr. Irwin was not in
the habit of coming near me. Then, was it for
the purpose he came that you were offended ?
Rather so. Why were you offendedl? Bceuse

148

I thought he had takei too much upon himself,

Mr. O'CONNOR:-I take it for granted,

in asking me the question.,_ Did you state to any that the Attorhey-General cannot say, there is
body that you were offended? I don't recollect no other way of proving it.
The JUDGE :-Well, this is he proper time.
that I did. Did you mention it to anybody to put
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Then, my Lord, after I
them on their guard ? I wrote about it. To whom
did you write ? To the Evening Star. When you have done with the witness, I shall ask for him
wrote to the Evening Star, did you state that no to be retained.
The JUDGE :-When you say to him, " Did
one had anything to communicate, and that it
was of no use Mr. Irwin asking ? I did not. you, or did you not write a letter ?" you must
Do you swear that? Yes. Positively? Positively. produce that letter, because, when the letter is
Mr.
After Mr. Irwin had been with you, did you seen, it will enable him to say whether he wrote
had been with" you, did you
write a letter
announcing that fact I did. You it or not.
?
did. After you announced that fact, did you
write a letter to me ? No; not to you. Did you
write a letter to the editor of the Evening Star? in great poverty when Mr. Irwin applied to you ?
Yes. Did you know that I was the editor of the I was rather short of money. Did you comEvening Star? Yes. And yet you did not write plain to Irwin, or anybody else, that you were
to me ? I wrote to the office. You wrote to starving ?- To Bayley, Leach, or anybody ?whom you knew to be the editor, did you not ? Did you borrow money from Leach ? I said that
I wrote Mr. Pardon. Was he the editor ? I did if I depended upon the Chartists, I might starve.
not direct to the editor ; it was communicated as Did you borrow money from Leach ? No. Never?
a paragraph. I did not commence it as a letter. Not at that time. Did you borrow 16s. to
Did you not consider Mr. Pardon the editor?bury your children? No! he paid me 15s. for
No.
No. Did you commence " Dear Editor" ? No. writing a lecture for him. After the conference
Was the letter to him ? It was to the Evening writing a lecture for him. After the conference
did you
Star. Was it to me ? Not particularly. Not you have spoken of had broken up, what
direct to you. Was there an application in it ? consider it was that perpetuated the disturbances?
Not directed to you. Wal it to the editor ? It A strike for wages. Were you the correspondent,
was to the office. Do you mean to the house. from Manchester and its neighbourhood, of the
Evening Star ? I was, sir.
(laughter.) Was there any application in it ?
The JUDGE :-Where is the Evening Star
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- On What?
my Lord, the letter will speak for itself. Let it published ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-In London, my Lord.be produced, and then we need not waste time in
considering the terms in wliich it was couched.
How soon did you receive money from Irwin
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Did you write to me for for the services you promised to render him ?
money to take you to America, out of Irwin's I cannot say. How much money did you reway ? No. You will swear positively that you ceive from Mr. Irwin prior to going before the
unever wrote for money to take you out of the magistrates, at Manchester ? I can't say. Were
country, because Irwin was tampering with you ?
with so much money that you
I will. Did you write for money at all ; I did, you burdened
how much? Perwas owing to me, and you wrote to cannot say exactly ?--About
because it
to Mr. Hill for haps a sovereign. Was that all you received?
me, saying, that I should apply
it was? I will
it. Why, you know that I had nothing to do I think it was. Will you swear
with the financial department of the Star? You not. Will you swear that you did not receive
told me to write to Mr. Hill. Were you paid two sovereigns? I will not, but I think I only
every week for your services ? While I was un- received one. Will you swear that you did not
der you, I was paid for my services. And you receive three ?-Before I gave in my deposition ?
did not write a letter for money to take you out -Yes ? Yes, I will. I did after you gave in
of the country ? [To the Court.] Your Lord- your depositions, and before you went out of the
ship has got enough. He has not denied havingcountry. Howmuch did you receive? Perhaps
?
written to me for money to go to America, to three sovereigns. Was that all I think that
take him out of Irwin's way.
was alr. Ilow many Chartist meetings do you
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I object to think you have attended? I can't calculate
this mode of examination. If there is any such them. yave you been in the abit of sendin
ave you been in the habit of sending
letter, let it be produced. He cannot afterwards hem.
for inprove a matter in the present transaction ; if the resolutions passed at those meetings
let it be sertion in the Northern Star and British States.
there is any letter to be produced,
'man? I have. Now, I ask you, if the general
shown to him now.

1O9
tenour of the principal resolutions has not for
years past been,-" and we pledge ourscve to
continue the present struggle unti the Chart r
.
becomes the Yaw of the land ? " It has for
ral 'years past.
Mr.
"Ttou
have got that
The JUDGE .-

O'Connor

e

before

Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes, my Lorii. u I want
to get it from a reporter. You were the secretary to Hunt's monument committee:' was
paid secretary. You took a areat ".teres; in
having a large gathering on that occasion ? I
i ask you on your oath, was not Mr.
did.
Scholefield, in particular, most anxious that
every thing should be given up which had the
slightest tendency to bring the people into collision with the authorities ? I thought so. From
what I heard I thought he would not have the
meeting on his premises at all, nor had he. Did
you write a letter to the Northern Star, relative
to the monument committee, as secretary? Perhaps I did., Perhaps you did. Did you or did
you not ? When ? I don't know which letter
you mean. I have written several. Just show
it. On the 11th of August. Here, sir, is a file
of the Northern Star of the 13th of August. Is
that letter yours ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord, I
is not
object to this mode of proceeding :-It
quite regular. I beg it to be understood, that
it shall not be an example for letting in every
thing.
The JUDGE :--What is it?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Tha witness
is asked if he wrote a letter, and what is before
your Lordship and the jury is in print, in a newspaper.
The JUDGE :-It is disagreeable to interfere,
to stop a defendant in anything which he may
think important to him, but I don't understand
the object of this question.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I
my Lord, it is to contradict him.

suppose,

Mr. O'CONNOR handed the file of the
Northern Star to the officer of the Court and
said:-Read the letter out.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-No, my Lord,
I object to that. The witness may be crossexamined as to the contents of anything he
formerly wrote.

you may say-" Now, did not you write that
letter,"'and now you explain it differently.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes, my Lord. The file
of the Northern Star was then handed ti
witness, and his attention having been callet
to the letter in question, he said :-" That is m
letter." [The letter referred to the Hunt's monu

ment committee, and will be found further on&
.n the cross-examination of this witness by th
efendant M'Cartney.]
Mr. O'CONNOR:--Now, Griffin, you say you
were correspondent to the Evening Star, up to
what period ? I cannot recollect. How soon
after you had been with Irwin did you
After I consented
cease to correspond ?
to give evidence, I did not write again.
At what time did you give over writing? I cannot recollect the date. Did you correspond after
the 20th of September? I don't think I did.
I don't believe I did.
After the 21st ?
Did you correspond after the 23rd ? I don't believe I did. Now, then, will you know your own
correspondence with the Evening Star? [Handing
witness a file of the Evening Star] now look, and
see if on the 20th, 21st, 22nd,23rd, and 24th, you
see any correspondence of yours there ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- I will not
consent to this, my Lord. I object more on account of the waste of time than anything else.
The JUDGE :-It is clearly not evidence.
The ATTORNEY-GEiNERAL:-Your Lordship will observe that Griffin's examination has
really been limited to the verifying of a written
resolution, and an address. I had asked him for
nothing more.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Will the Attorney-General
say that I should not examine him to credit ?
The JUDGE :-Certainly you can.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now, Griffin, you have
been an active member of the Chartist movement ? Yes. Did you ever yourself recommend any means being resorted to except peaceable and quiet means ? I never did. That you
swear on your oath ? I swear it on my oath.
Do you know Hitchinand Doolan ? Yes. Of
what town are they ? Of Stockport, I think.
Do you know where the workhouse at Stockport
is situated? Yes. On your oath did you ever
make any application to those two men, or any
other two, to burn down the workhouse ? No,
oath did you.not propose the establishment of a

The JUDGE :-You may cross-examine him rifle club for the youths, and that you would
procure a sergeant to drill them ? This is the
as to the contents of anything he has written,
I ever heard of such a thing.
into his hand, first time
and then, putting the document

160
in this trial besides Irwin.-Now, who were
they ? I had no communication with other persons. Did you try to induce other persons to
join you in giving information ? Yes, Cartledge.
Now, sir, when did you try to induce Cartledge
first ? When he was in the "lockups."
Now,
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Why, my Lord, I thought Griffin, what do you call inducement ? I told
the witness would have the candour to admit him there was a long imprisonment before him,
the fact-(laughter.) Do you know Sadler, the and if he thought proper, he could go into the
constable, of Stockport ? I do. Did you know witness box, instead of into the dock. That was
him in 1839 ? I did. Had you any communi- when he was in the "lIockups ?"-Did you send
cation with him during the riots ? I was sent any money to Cartledge's mother-in-law before
to him. Did you render any services to him ? you were with him in the "lockups ?" No, it
Not against the Chartists. Sadler met me in was not that sovereign. Then, what sovereign
was it you did send him ? A sovereign I got from
the street, and told me he had taken an active
my brother; and ten shillings I got from James
part against the Chartists, and his life was in
Leach for myself. You sent that to Cartledge's
danger. I then called a meeting of the com- mother-in-law ? No, I did not send it; I gave
mittee, and passed a resolution not to destroy it myself. You gave a sovereign to Cartledge's
property or life; and I took this resolution to mother-in-law, before Cartledge was in the
Sadler. Did you tender your services to Sadler " lockups ?" Yes. And after you had induced
to look out for news for him, and report ? I Cartledge to give information, or as you say, to
did not. Now, do you know a person, named prefer the witness box to the dock, how long did
Brooke, with whom you worked for Mr. Schole- you remain in Manchester? Till I went to the
assizes. After the assizes, did you and Cartfield ? Yes.
ledge go together? No, sir. You swear that?
The JUDGE :-That is not the Brooke of
I swear that. Well, how long after the special
Todmorden ?
commission did you remainin Manchester? PerMr. O'CONNOR:-No, my Lord. Now, haps two days. Now, how often did you see
did you ever tell Brooke that you would be a: Cartledge from the time you induced him to give
nail in O'Connor's coffin, and that you had it in evidence, till you left Manchester altogether ?
your power to destroy me? No, but I said I The last time I saw him was at Hyde, when he
would expose his conduct, and publish the letters was examined. Now, what took you into the
I had written to him which he had not answered. Slockups" in Manchester ?-You were not conI said this on account of the manner in which fined then? No. Then when did you go to the
you had served me. For paying you your wages "lockups ?" When I saw Irwin.
as long as you had been in my service ? No, sir,
Mr. OICONNOR :-Mind that, my Lord; it
but from fetchingme from a situation in London, was after he saw Irwin.
[To witness.] Did
and then leaving me to starve. Did not you Irwin desire you to do it ? He left it to my own
give me notice ? Yes. Then how did I turn you choice. To your taste ? No, he said if Cartledge
out to starve ? The paper was continually praising went into the witness box, probably the prosecume before that, and Mr. Hill, himself, said tion would be stayed against him. Then, did
" The only fault we have to find with our excel- you tell Cartledge, that if he went into the witlent correspondent is, that he is too industr-ious." ness box, the prosecution would not be pressed ?
(Laughter.) Well, that was anrexcellent fault. I told him that it probably would not. Did you
You are finding fault with me for being too in-,tell him who sent you? No. Now, would you
dustrious. Not in the-least, sir. But you swear be allowed to see any other prisoner? Yes.
you tad no conversation with Brooks, except Then you did not go to induce any other prithat? No, I said I would expose you through soner ? No, but I have been allowed to see them.
the press, for the manner in which you behaved Had you any conversation afterwards with Cartto me. Did not you say in Hargrave's house, ledge about the trial? None at all. When did
in Brown-street, that you would be revenged of you see him next? I saw him after I came from
me before you died? No, I never made use of Ireland. Then you had not a word of conversawords to that effect. You were told at the tion with him about the trial? No. You did
Mosley Arms, and I was led to understand that not open your lips about the trial ? .Yes, about
that was the reason why you and I fell out. Then the trial, but not about the evidence. I have
it was before you were dismissed that I was told been prohibited from having any words with him
that? Yes. Now, Griffin, you said you nad h
ad when oyt'ers were present. Irwin gave us strict
communications with other persons concerned orders to have no conversation with others.
The JUDGE :--You cannot ask a great number of irrelevant questions, for the AttorneyGeneral will have to contradict them afterwards, and the examination will then be interminable.

161
Now, when you were in Ireland, did you look
out for work of any kind? No. Did you do one
day's work since you saw Irwintill this moment ?
Not except reading and writing. You did no'
hard work. Now, is it a fact that you were in a
state of the most abject poverty when Irwin first
met you? No. Were you reduced? I was in
poverty, but I was working for the Evening Star
Did you not
when I gave the information.
know that I had nothing to do with the payment
of the persons employed on that paper ? Mr.
Hobson ordered me to write for the Evening
Star-you were deceived. Now, Griffin, are
you a good Chartist now ? Yes, sir. Do you
subscribe to the six points, now ? You told us so.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - No, he
only said he knew them.
MIr. O'CONNOR :-So you subscribe to them
now? I do. What was the state of Manchester
after the conference separated ? It was in an excited state. Afterwards ? Yes. Did you write
to the Evening Star, stating the good work of
the conference had been frustrated by the millowners? Perhaps I did. That the good work
and good intentions of the conference were frustiated by the mill-owners ? I won't swear to
those words. They may be the spirit of what I
said, or something to the same effect. Now, sir,
during the many Chartist meetings you have attended, what has been your opinion of the disposition of the people generally ? Peaceable. What
have been the principles that have been universally
inculcated on the people? Political principles.
What has been the tendency of them? Tending
to peace at their meetings.
Mr. O'CONN OR :-Now, Mr.Attorney-General
do you put the Northern Star of the 13th of
August in evidence ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-No, but that
of the 20th.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-You say you have attended
many meetings which I have attended? Witness :-Yes. Now, have you heard me complain
at every meeting that there was no man in this
world, whose intentions were so much misrepresented as mine, by the press ? Yes. You
you
have? Yes. IHave not heard me at several
meetings tell the people that the very moment an attempt was made to force them
into a violation of the peace and they consented,
that moment their cause was destroyed? I think
I have heard you say something to that effect.
Now, upon your oath, have I not made that a
part of my discourses at all the meetings I have
been at? If those were not your words, they
were the spirit of them. Latterly,has it been so ?
I have heard you speak strongly but not so ex-

citing as some. But you say the general tenour
of all my speeches was to preserve peace, law and
order ? Yes. Now, Griffin, I ask you have you
not heard the Northern Star and myself reprobated for not allowing the people to go into the
" strike" ?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord, I
must object to that; it is exceedingly vague.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-The Attorney - General
charges the Northern Star with causing the
strike. Here is the reporter, and I want to
show you what character the Northern Star has
gained for itself by the course it has pursued.
The JUDGE :-What the Attorney-General
charges, is not against the Northern Star, but a
particular passage in that particular paper, as
having a certain tendency. You may take that
paper, and show that, taking the whole together,
it has quite adifferent bearing. He onlyselects one
passage from that paper, and shews its tendency,
but you cannot set off your exhortations to peace
and quietness, on other occasions, as against
exhortations to the contrary contained in a particular paper which the Attorney-General has
put in.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-It is perfectly competent
for me to put all my acts into evidence during
the period from the 1st of August to the 1st of
October.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-In my opening, I gave Mr. O'Connor credit for having, on
various occasions, exhorted the people to quiet
and peace. What I object to now is, that Mr.
O'Connor asks the witness if he has not heard
that complaints have been made against the
Northern Star for having done so and so. Mr.
O'Connor's general character, or the general
character of his newspaper, I should not object to, but I object to what other people said
about it.
The JUDGE :-That is going as far as you can,
I believe.
Mr O'CONNOR:-Very well, then, I don't
press the question.
Cross-examination resumed :-Are you acquainted with the newsvenders of Manchester ?
Not generally. But you know their position and
politics? I know some of them. Do you know
when any society, or any individual, having a placard to publish, send them to the shops of newsvenders, for the purpose of being placed on
boards outside their shops for public exhibition ?
I believe they are. You know that is the common practice? Yes, sir. How long have you
known James Leach? Two years. You have

162
been in: onstant communication withhihim? esj, Not many. Did you know the youth, Ramsden?
sir. I will venture to put a question to:you oa I did not. Is he not a child ?-A mere boy ?his behalf. What is your opinion of his charac- How old is he ? I believe he is eighteen years
ter.? He is a very honest man. Has he at all of age. Is he not quite a growing youth? Yes,
times been opposed to violence ? In my hearing he is a youth.
hehas. Yes, and you are the general reporter of
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes, a small boy; that
the Chartist body, and he is constantly in the will do.
habit'of addressing the people.-Now, I ask you,
Cross-examined by RICHARD OTLEY :
however others may be opposed to him, is henot
Once,
he not Were you ever in Sheffield, Griffin?
a respectable man, on alloccasions, and is
know a
esteemed as an excellent man by all parties ? IVave prior to the 17th of August. Did you
heard all political parties speak highly of him. person named Richard Otley ? Only by name.
I understood you to say, in giving in the names
I believe you are aware, Griffin, that very angry
between the Corn of those you saw at the conference, that you
discussions have taken place
law repealers and the Chartists during the last were personally acquainted with him.
The JUDGE :-He did not say that. I have
year and a half ? Yes. Were you present on one
occasion when you saw me knocked down three it here. He said these persons were there,
times, and taken out of the meeting bleeding, in naming them.
OTLEY :-And that he was personally acconsequence of a blow on the temple with a
stone'? I was not present, you had sent me to quainted with them.
Ashton, but I heard the report. You were aware
The JUDGE :-I am not aware of that; but
that a meeting took place? Yes. Were you you may ask him.
before the magistrates when I applied for proOTLEY :-Did not you say you were persontection against these parties ? I was not. Is it
the general feeling in Manchester, and have you ally acquainted with them? Witness :-I said,
not known it for two years, that the working that the parties who were there gave such and
classes feel that the police rendered them no pro- such a name.
tection ? Not generally. Has it not been stated
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Is that the
that the policeman were the bludgeon men of the Mr. Otley who was there. Witness :-Yes.
League ?
OTLEY :-Did you ever hear of riots taking
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I must ob- place in Sheffield about that time? I don't
ject to that question. It is really out of all cha- know that I did. 'Did you ever see me at any
racter.
meeting at Lancashire or Yorkshire, and hear
Mr. O'CONNOR:--Were you at a meeting
me speak ? I have not. When you saw me at
in Stephenson's-square, at which Mr. Cobden
the New Bailey, in Manchester, you said you
and others attended ? Yes. Did you see the
or a
authorities there ? I did. Did you see the work- did not know whether I was the chairman,
ing,people there? I did. Did you see the police person of the name of Mr. Arthur, or Richard
there ? I did. Did you see the magistrates there? Otley? I knew that Arthur was in the chair.
The JUDGE :-Did you say that ? I said ArI did, sir. What occurred? There was a great
deal of fighting, and a row. On whose part was" thur was there, but I could not distinguish him.
the fighting ? I did not distinguish the party, bit
OTLEY :-Buit you took me for Mr. Arthur?
I understand it was your own countrymen.- I took you for the chairman.
(Laughter.)
The JUDGE :-He does not say he took you
Mr. MURPHY :-You have a right to doi
for M'Arthur, he took you for the chairman.
what you like with your own.
OTLEY :-Then, when you could not distinMr. DUNDAS:-It seems. they thought so,.
But to which party did they attach themselves ? guish me from M Arthur, and have not seen me
I understood to the League. Then,why'did you since, how ia it that you can distinguish me now?
notsay so, sir ?--My owncountrymen are always! Recause I recollect seeing you in the conference,
fatnous fellows for fighting. It was my own ,and heard you making a speech. What was the
countrymen who knocked me down. Did you itendency of that speech ? It was against the
think weere conspirators-when we met?
strike. Do you recollect all that were neutral
The ATTOR1NEYYGENERAL objected to, in that conference? I do not recollect anybody
the quesition.
against
Thb -JIUDGE:-.Ite says you met for a ety that was neutral, they were either for or
the strike. Did you ever read anything I have
laudable purpose.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Were there many persons written, reconmending the Chartists to join the
there at the conference ?-You don't know? strike-movement, -or recommending physical

163
force ? I never read anything from you recom- some recollection of your examination in the
mending physical force, or recommending a 'New Bailey Court-house in September last?
M'CARTNEY :-In October, perhaps. When
connection of the Chartist-movement with the
asked in whose handwriting the corrections in
strike.
the address, called the " Executive Address,"
OTLEY:-That is sufficient.
were, what induced you to say point blank, " I
Cross-examined by BERNARD M'CARTNEY:
,will not tell"? Because I did not know. You
-Well, Mr. Griffin, we have met:once more.
said you would not tell, because youdid not
You have been in Ireland, I understand ? Yes, know ? Tobe sure. And why was it necessary
sir. Mr. O'Connor has asked you repeatedly for you to say, " I will not tell," seeing that you
how you spent your time in Ireland, I also want did not know.
to know from you how you spent your time
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Was that
while there? By reading, writing, and moderate examination taken down in writing ? Witness :exercise. Were you hunting, fishing, and shoot- Yes. I said " I will not tell," and then being
pressed, I said, " Well, I believe it is Carting? I was neither fishing nor hunting.
The JUDGE :-Were you shooting ? Wit- ledge's."
M'CARTNEY :-Do you remember on the
iess:-Do you press that question?
M'CARTNEY :-Yes. Witness:-Ihavebeen morning of the 16th or 17th of August, having
shootingat times. At what small parties for amuse- any conversation with John Campbell?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Is Campment have you been ? You have not been engaged
in any way directly or indirectly, with the Irish bell here ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :--No.
police establishment ? I have not, sir. To whom
I
did those arms which you have used in your
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Then
sporting expeditions belong? I borrowed them. think it right to interpose, because one defendant
From whom? I borrowed a little carbine from has no right to ask questions relative to another
parties there. It would not be parties there- defendant.
from whom did you borrow it ? From a man who
The JUDGE:-Well, I thought so, but I
lives there. What is he ? He keeps a shop. He thought it better not to stop him. If it has a
is not connected with the Irish constabulary tendency to implicate the defendant, it is better
force ? Not at all. You have said, in answer to not to put it.
some question connected with the cross-examinaM'CARTNEY:-It has not the remotest tention, that you were prohibited from taking notes
dency to do so. Where was this? Witness:of the address ? No, sir, I was only prohibited
At Brown's hotel. You then expressed your
from taking notes of the speeches. I was not
prohibited from taking notes of the resolutions. - surprise that I could always appear in a good
M'CARTNEY:-My Lord, if you refer to coat, seeing I was not engaged in a good emyour notes you will find he said he was prohi- ployment ? No. Did you express to him any
bited from taking notes of the address. [To the suspicion you entertained as to some parties not
witness.] Then, if you said that, you have made being much to be depended upon in the Chartist
a mistake? Yes.
movement? I had no conversation with him on
The JUDGE :-No, he was not prohibited
that subject at all. That will do. You did not
from taking notes of the address, or resolutions, walk out with him ? No. Very well. Now, sir,
bit in consequence of being prohibited from
you have sworn that you did not borrow money
taking notes of the speeches, he took no notes of
from James Leach, but you said he gave you 15s.
the address.
youawarethat, through- for writing a lecture for him? Yes, he lent me
M'CARTNEY:-Are
out the entire of the counties, which have been two half-crowns, but I thought Mr. O'Connor was
the scene of the late disturbances, the slightest referring to the 15s. which was not borrowed.
anticipation of this strike was entertained when I did not say I did not borrow money. You
this conference was called together ? I don't said he gave you 15s. for writing a lecture? He
think there was, it never came to my knowledge. did. Was it before or after Leach's lecture was
It was three months before the strike when this delivered at Carpenters' Hall that your child
address was first written, and you were aware, died ? It was before. And you borrowed no
that particular care was taken, at the conference, money; that 15s. was given you for writing the
to ascertain that everydelegate had been legally
lecture ? Yes. The 15s. with which you buried
electedat a public meeting, held in the locality
was paid you for reporting a lecture
which he professed to represent ? I thought so. your child
Such was your impression of our mode of con- which was neither delivered nor reported? He
ducting business, Now, sir, Ipresume you have gave me the 15s. I think before I wrote it. I

believe he did. I believe you have resided sometime at Stockport? Yes. Do you know Mtr.
Saddler? Yes. Will you swear that Saddler
never charged you publicly with having made
certain advances to give him information ? Not
more than I said before, in reference to the resolution sent himn from the committee. Did you
attend many of what were called the "Trades'
Delegate Meetings," in Manchester? Yes. The
town, at the holding of the first trades' delegates'
meeting which you attended, and which, I believe, was the first held, was in a state of very
great excitement-probably turbulence ? Yes
Do you know of your own knowledge, that when
the public got to lknow that the trades' delegates'
meetings were taking place that that excitement
began to sober down considerably ? I don't know
that. Have you never said so? No; I have
heard it remarked, but I never said it myself.
You don't know it of your own knowledge ? I
did not take that much notice. From the first
of the meetings held in Sherwood Inn, Carpenters' Hall, and the Hall of Science, did you see
any of that uproarious disturbance in the neighbourhood of Ancoat's-lane, or any of those places
in which such disturbances had previously taken
place ? I don't know. But were you not passing
that New-cross frequently ? Yes, and the town
was in a state of great excitement.
Mr. MURPHIY :-What day? Witness:-Perhaps on the 11th or 12th of August.
M'CARTNEY :-From the 10th and 11th to
the 15th and 16th. But did you see the same
uproar after the meetings, that was previously in
existence? I think the trades' meetings had a
tendency to keep up the agitation. Do you
think it had a tendency to repress the riots
out of doors ? Not in the least. Did you ever
write so to the Evening Star ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I object, my
Lord, to the question.
The JUDGE:-You cannot ask that.
M'CARTNEY:-Do you remember my being
arrested for attending that conference ? I do, sir.
You remember visiting me whilst in the prison
in Manchester? Yes. Do you remember sympa,
thising with me? I do. And you remember expressing your gratification for my liberation ?
Yes. And accompanying me to the railway,
when I was leaving for Liverpool ? I did. You
remember us adjourning to a tavern till the train
would start? Yes; but I advised you not to go
further with that, because it would injure yourself.

The JUDGE :.-.With what ?
WITNESS :-The conversation at the tavern.
M'CARTNEY :-Did not you then, when
shaking hands with me, in an apparently friendly
way, know that you had given that information
to the authorities, on the strength of which I
was arrested afterwards ? Not officially. Had
you given information to the officer ? Yes. Just
listen to this:" THE HUNT MONUMENT COMMITTEE.
" To the Chartists of Manchester, and the surrounding towns and villages.-The committee
appointed to superintend the erection of a monument to the memory of the late Henry Hunt,
Esq., feel sorrow at having to inform you, and
those other friends who had intended to honour"
us with their presence at the procession on the
16th of August, that after duly considering upon
the present awful and truly alarming state of this
district, and after every member present had given
his opinion upon the matter, the following resolution was passed unanimously :" That, taking all things into consideration,
the committee deem it the most advisable, safe,
and judicious course to be pursued, under the circumstances, to abandon the procession announced
to take place on the 16th of August; and that
the Press be requested to insert this resolution
and short address in their current publications."
" The district is certainly in a very unsettled
state, and the members of the committee believe
that if any disturbance ensued on that day, the
enemies to the Chartist movement would snatch
at the opportunity, and throw the blame on the
committee and the Chartists generally. They
perceive that the Manchester Guardian has

already began to charge the Chartists as th
originators of, and as taking part in, the disturbances already had. A charge as false as it
is cowardly and malicious."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord,
this is a long question.
I
M'CARTNEY ---t is almost done now, Mr.
Attorney-General.
"The meeting, respecting the monument, will
be holden on the 16th of August, in the Rev.
James Scholefield's burial ground, Every-street.
The ground is private property; and the meet.
ing will, therefore, be strictly safe and legal.
The delegates are expected to be here, according to previous announcement; likewise Feargus
O'Connor, Esq. The tea party and ball w-ill
also be holden in the evening, for which all due
arrangements are being made.

165
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Will your
'In adopting this course, the eommittee feel
that they best consult the interest and safety of Lordship look at the note.
The JUDGE :-I have examined my notes,
the Chartist cause. Were they to go on with
the procession, and bring upon them the inter- and can find nothing of the kind.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-You say
ference of the magistracy, tumult might be the
Scholefield asked a question, or gave some
cMr.
consequence.

Life would be endangered, blood 1
informatio n

W

if

ao

i

e

v

give? He brought information that Turner, the
printer, had been arrested. Mr. Scholefield also
brought in a sovereign, and gave it to the chairman. I cannot recollect the words he used in
handing it in, but he either said it was for the
Executive Address, or to carry on the conference.
Now, you were asked by my learned friend
Murphy, and also by M'Cartney, about being in
Ireland. Have you been out of the way ? I have,
sir. Why did you go out of the way ? Because
parties were condemning me through the papers,
and made it dangerous for to remain. Did
and made it dangerous for me remain. Did
any parties say anything to you ? It was intimated
to me in Manchester, that if I appeared in the
whole of it ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- No, my box here, I should be assassinated. Now, Griffin,
Lord, whatever the witness wrote, we ought to you have been asked another question about the
have the writing here.
conference being summoned some months before
WITNESS :-It states at the end of it, that it took place ? Yes, sir. What was it summoned
it was written at the express wish of the Hunt's about? It was summoned for the purpose of reviewing the plan of organization of the Chartist
monument committee.
The JUDGE :-Did you cause it to be prin- body, and setling all differences amongst the
ted ? I did not, the Hunt's monument committee leaders. There was a strong controversy going
did.
at the
did.on time. Had the summons of the conM'CARTNEY:-Did you cause it to be ferenceanythingtodowiththeHunt'smonupublished in the Northern Star ? I sent it by ment comm
order of the Hunt's monument committee. And
it was published? Yes, by order of the Hunt's conference, excep the resolutions and the dmonument committee. What :was the date on dresses you have mentioned? Not in the least,
which the publication appeared? I cannot recol- not in my
lect it-icannot recollect every article that I wrote settling differences? Not in the least, the Charfor' the press. It is dated the 11th, and I pre- tet or the strike was the whole conversation.
sume it would appear on the 13th? It would- Not word said about Hunt's monument ? Not
predielya
bit, You answered to Mr. O'Connor, that
The dATORNEY-GENERALtk:-i es any you were not at some meeting in Manchester he
other dfndant ask i any questis ?spoke of, because you had boeen sent to Ashton
answer.
A
R..
.
by him? Yes. What day was that? I can't reRe-examined by the ATTeRNEY-mENE- member the day exactly. Well, you went to
spilled, and our righteous movement greatly
endangered and retarded. We want to obtain
the Charter by moral, peaceable, and constitutional means, and not by force and tumult.
" Signed on behalf of the Committee,
" Wu. GRIFFIN, Secretary.
sAugust 11th, 1842."
Did you write that, Griffin?
WITNESS :-I believe I did, at the express
wish of the Hunt's monument committee; I
day
wrote it on the 11th of August, the day on'
on
wrote itappeared. llth of you pleasethe read the
Will August, to
which it on the

Ashton.

How long before the conference was

Mylearnedfriend asked you with respept o what Ithat ? About two months previous. Oh, then it
Sckoefild did. On the 16th and th, do you was not any meeting which took place during the
know that he went to Carpenters' Hallc.to
I
Mr, BAINES :-- did pt ask him about conference? No. Then the meeting to which
Carpenters' Hall; what I asked was with refer- he referred, was a meeting which too place two
months
ence to the places you took him in the examina- more? Yes. Did you see after the 16th, on the
io in chief.
or on any other days, any of the Executive
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-You asked 16th,
about
he went to the Carpenters' Hfll, on the Address Placards see it? Manchester? Yes.
whether
When did you first
16th and 17th?
Mr. DUNDAS :-Does this arise in examinaMr. BAINES:-CertainlynotMr.Attorneytion, my Lord ? I object to it. I don't see any
General. I asked him with reference to the
conference, but, certainly, with reference to no- thing to warrant it.
thing else.

The JUDGE :-I don't see how it arose.
M

166
The ATTORNEY-GENRAL::-Iwill state
Mr. WORTLEY:--Just so, my Lord. He is
in one moment how it arose. Mr. O'Connor only to speak to what he has in his notes;
asked whether the object of the conference was there was one reporter who was to speak to
to discuss political opinions,
facts, and his presence in court was objected to.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I did not hear.
Mr. MURPHY :-I apprehend it was underThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Well, that stood, from the beginning, that no witnesses
was the answer given. Then Mr. O'Connor were to be allowed to remain in court. These

asked whether he saw anything except what
was tending to peace.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I did not ask any such
question. It was in reference to other meetings.
The JUDGE :-Meetings of trades' delegates.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-He asked
whether at this meeting he saw anything, except
what was tending to peace, and the witness said,
"yes;" I merely wish to know whether he was
aware, that after that meeting, the Executive
Address appeared ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-That does not arise out of
it.-It
is not in the meeting.
The JUDGE :-No, I think not.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Very well,
did you take a note of any of O'Connor's
speeches ? I did. I did not take it down verbatim, but the spirit of his speech. Well, what
was it ? To alter the resolution, by substituting
for the word " recommend" the word" approve,"
and take advantage of the strike, as the trades
would join, and they would be a great auxiliary.
Just so. Did he assign any reason for that
alteration of the word "recommend" for the
word "approve" or "approves"? He said it
would make it more legal, and evade the law in
case of the failure of the strike. Now, afterwards M'Cartney asked you something about an
address ? The first address was out before. The
first address was calling the people together to
celebrate the completion of the monument. But
that had nothing to do with the address passed
at the meeting of the 17th ? Not at all, sir.
JOHN STANLEY :-Was then called, and,
when about to be swornMr. DUNDAS asked him :-Have not you
been in court during the trial ? I have, sir, with
the permission of the Judge.
The JUDGE:-Speak up! My Lord, I have
been in court with your permission, as one of
the reporters, in whose favour, at the commencement of the proceedings, an exception was
made.
The JUDGE :-[To Mr. Dundas.] He has
merely come to give an account of something he
reported.

notes, my Lord, are the most material facts in
the case.
The JUDGE :-The question was asked, in
the beginning, whether he should remain in
court, and you all agreed to it.
Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord, I submit that for
these reasons this witnessThe JUDGE :-I will hear no argument about
it; after what has already transpired in Court, I
shall certainly receive his evidence.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I recollect,my Lord, that
you made the exception in his favour, and that
we assented to it.
JOHN HANLY, was then examined by Sir
GREGORY LEWIN.-In the month of August
last, were you a reporter for the Manchester
Guardian? I was, sir. On the 15th of August
was there a meeting of the trades' delegates in
Manchester ? There was, sir. Where was it
held? At the Sherwood Inn, Tib-street. Was
it in the forenoon? It was at ten, or eleven
o'clock in the forenoon. Who were present?Were you? Yes. Do you know how it had been
convened? It was convened by a placard issued
by the " Five Trades." Who was in the chair ?
Alexander Hutchinson. Was there a secretary ?
There was. Who was he ? Charles Stuart. Were
there any persons there called scrutineers ? There
were, sir. And what did they do-the scrutineers? They examined the credentials of the various persons representing themselves as delegates,
before they were admitted to the room. Well, I
believe, after this, there was an adjournment
moved to Carpenters' Hall ? There was. By
whom was that moved? Witness produced notes
of the proceedings, in order to ascertain from
them who the mover of the adjournment was.
The JUDGE:-Are these the notes you made at
the time? They are, my Lord. I wish to explain
the manner in which these notes were taken.
Some of them were taken in the ordinary mode
of writing, and such parts of the speeches and
proceedings as I thought of importance I took in
short hand, and afterwards copied them out. The
former are always in the third person, the latter
in the first. I have the originals here, of both,
and if you wish I shall read either the originals
or the copies.
The JUDGE : - Was that in long-hand
copied from the short-hand immediately afterwards? Yes, my Lord, and these [holding up

167
the copies of the notes] are a fuller report than
what appeared in the newspapers.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN : - Were these
notes taken at the time? Witness :-They were.
Very well, never mind any further explanations,
but go on. By whom was the adjournment
moved ? I have a note of who moved it, but I
cannot speak to it from recollection-allow me
to look. Well, did they adjourn to Carpenters'
Hall ? They did. At what time was the chair
taken there ? At one o'clock in the afternoon.
And by whom? Alexander Hutchinson. Who
was present ?-Any of those whom you knew?
I have a list of the names which I took at the
meeting as they were handed in. I know sonie of
them, but not all. Who were there that you
knew ?I knew Bernard M'Cartney and Alexander
Hutchinson.
The JUDGE :-Is that the defendant M'Cartney ? Yes, my Lord,-I will read the names of
those who were there. I took them down as they
were handed in.
The

ATTORNEY - GENERAL: - How

many have you got? Witness :-Upwards of
eighty.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-We don't want
.them. Was John Leach there? I could not tell
from memory; I will look at the list.
he JUDGE:-Are you able to swear he was
there ? No, my Lord; I am able to say, that his
name was announced as a person that was there.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Are you able to
swear that a person calling himself John Leach
was there? Witness:--Yes. Erom whence did
he come ? From Hyde. Howwas he described?
He, along with George Candelet, represented the
factory operatives of Hyde. Was George Candelet there ? Yes. Was Augustus Frederick
Taylor there? Yes. Where was he from ? From
Royton. Whom did he represent? The powerloom weavers of Royton. Was a person named
David Morrison there? [Witness examines his
notes to find if Morrison's name is in the list.]
Was William Woodruffe there? There are so
many names in this list, that it requires a little
time to ascertain whether any particular name is
among the number. David Morrison was there.
Whom did he represent? The mechanics of Patrieroft. Was William Woodruffe there? He
was. Whom did he represent? The cordwainers
of Ashton. Was Albert Woolfenden there? He
was. Whom did he represent? A public meeting in Ashton. Now, you say Bernard M'Cartney was there; Who did he represent ? Ie was
from Leigh. Were there speeches made? There
were. Will you tell me the general character of
the speeches that were made?
Mr. MURPHY :-We had better have the
speeches themselves.

Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-What were the
speeches about? Witness :-Thefirst speech was
made by a person named Duffy. What was the
character of his speech? He said the Anti-corn.
law League originated the disturbances, and
complained
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Never mind about
his complaining.
The JUDGE:-Go on. Witness:-Perhaps
it would be better to read the speech than to trust
to my recollection of it.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Read it.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Let us have the
substance of it. Witness then read the following :-William Duffy, a delegate from the Manchester tailors, said, he thought the delegates had
at this time a very serious duty to perform. As
the representatives of the people, it was right
they were able and willing to do their duty
and vindicate their position. On Saturday, a
placard was issued by the trades, expressive
of the sentiments of the delegates. In that
placard they called on the working classes to cooperate, for the purpose of preserving property,
and preventing violence and outrage, aid at
the same time, to use every lawful means in
their power to obtain their own just rilhts. How
They had been
had they been answered?
answered by a document emanating from the
constituted authorities of this town-a document
illegal in its character, terms, and purport, and
calculated to excite the public mind. He had a
motion to bring before the meeting, bearing on
the objects for which they had assembled; but
he thought it necessary to take a preliminary
step, in order to convince the government, as
well as the authorities of this town, that they
(the delegates) were not to be intimidated. He
could scarcely believe, that the mayor of Manchester and the magistrates of this district would
have issued the proclamation to which he referred. He could not think, that they would take
the responsibility on themselves of issuing such
a placard as was that day exhibited on the walls
of the town. Itmust have proceeded, he at first
thought, from some evil-disposed persons. That
placard stated, that the authorities of the town
would disperse, as illegal, every meeting, no matter for what object it might be called. They had
now assembled as the representatives of the
trades; and were the Lord Chancellor of England
to enter the door, and command them to leave
the place, they should not do so. The authorities of this town wished to disperse meedings
of the working classes, in order to stis te

voice of the people. The workiag classes, how.
ever, were deeply interested in the preservation
of the peace; and, therefore, it became the duty
of the delegates to meet such a hostile declaration as that which had been issued as it deserved to be met, and thus to inspire their
constituents with confidence in their firmness
and discretion. The delegates, then, should
evince a determination to resist any inroad on
their just rights, which were guaranteed to them
by the laws and constitution of the country.The magistrates of this town should have been
the last people in the world to talk of force.
The men whose names were on that placard
were, no doubt; respectable and estimable men;
but in their character as magistrates they had
,not been so very tenacious as to the means by
which the people should express their opinions,
when they (the magistrates) had dictated the
subject on which those opinions should be expressed."
" I am glad" (continued Duffy) " that I am
now in the presence of reporters, who will
report, fully and faithfully, who those men are
who have their names appended to such a document as tfat. We are assembled here for the
express purpose of preserving the public peace.
I had the honour of making a suggestion, at
Carpenters' Hall, upon which a resolution was
founded, and in accordance with that resolution
this assembly was called into existence. Could
we give a greater proof of our sincerity and disposition to maintain the peace of society, than
in calling together the heads of the various
trades-men whose feelings and sympathies
were identical with our own,-to consult on the
best means we ought to adopt under existing
circumstances. We are the true conservators
of honour. But the magistrates, whose names
are on that placard, are those who have taken
every possible means to raise the public indignation. There are names there of persons, in the
character of magistrates, who, only a few days
ago, called on us to send an address to the government to stop the supplies-to take the most
revolutionary step that it was possible to taketo take the purse of the country out of the
.ands of the executive, and to set legal authority itself in abeyance, by placing the disposable
means of the country-the army and navy, and
all the appurtenances of government, in the hands
of commissioners. That house did not comply
with that threat. Who could expect they
-would ? Because that house, and the members

who constitute it, have iaterests directly opposed to the interests of the people. But we have
taken a hint from Brooks, Cobden, and Robert
Gardner-we have taken a bint from the Anticorn-law League, whose lecturers are, at this moment, carrying staves as special eqnstables. If
these men think that they will intimidate usthat now, after having conjured up the public
mind to the highest possible pitch, they can
allay it at their pleasure-if they can turn round
and say, ' we are corn law leaguers to-day, and,
presto, we are magistrates to-mdrrow, and if
you. do not exactly as we bid you we will send
the special constables upon you'-they were
much mistaken."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Is that all ?
There is a little more, but it is nearly to the
same purport.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Was there a placard there ? Duffy proposed a resolution.
Sir GREGORY LE WIN :-What was the resolution? William Duffy, having advised the
delegates to use their influence to prevent disturbance, concluded by proposing that the following address to the inhabitants of Manchester should be printed and placarded:" Resolved,-That this delegate meeting views
with the greatest indignation a placard headed
' A proclamation to the inhabitants of Manchester and the surrounding districts,' in the name of
the constituted authorities. We, the delegates
chosen by the unanimous voice of the great body
of the working classes in public meetings assembled of their various bodies legally convened,
feel called upon, by the urgency of the case, to
declare most solemnly our firm determination to
stand up in the vindication of our just and constitutional right of assembling and discussing all
matters in which we conceive our interests in
any degree involvedSir GREGORY LEWIN:-We don't want any
more of that-Answer the questions, and don't
read. Was there a meeting on the 16th at Carpenters' Hall ? There was not. Was there
another meeting on the 16th at Carpenters'
Hall ? Not of the delegates; there was one at
the Hall of Science. Well, did they adjourn
from Carpenters' Hall on the 15th to the Hall of
Science ? Yes, and they met there the next day.
Did they afterwards go to Carpenters' Hall ?
No. Was there a tea party on the 16th ? Yes.
Where was that held? At Carpenters' Hall.
Were you present? I was. Who was there?
The samine persons you had seen before-any of

169

them ? I did not take full notice of that meeting. Do you know James Scholefield ? Yes.
While you were at Carpenters' Hall, did he come
in? Yes. When he came in, to whom did he
address himself, and what did he say ? I should
not like to speak from recollection of what he
said. Did you take any notes of what he said ?
Yes, I have some notes, but I have not a note of
his entire speech. I merely took such notes as
woiild enable me to write a paragraph about the
tea party for the Manchester Guardian. Then
refer to your notes, and tell me what he said
When I entered the room, Mr. Scholefield was
adiressing the meeting-Well, what did he say ?
The first.I find here in my notes is this--" Their
day was coming, and when it comes it would
come with a vengeance-"
The JUDGE :-Addressing the meeting, did
he say, " your day ?" Yes, your day.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:- Well, go on. Witness :-He then told them to enjoy themselves,
and to remember what occurred 16 years ago,
reminded them of what they endured then, and
said, " After sorrow comes pleasure, and this is
one of the pleasurable occasions though mingled
with sorrowful sensations."

seconded by Higginbotham, and ultimately withdrawn, as unworthy the noticeof the body. Was
there another resolution proposed by William
Stott? The next resolution I see, was moved by
Duffy. Well, were there one or two moved ?
Yes, but it is better, perhaps, to take them as
they come, in order to prevent confusion.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - You had
better answer the questions.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-You had better
go on as we ask them. Will you give us the
resolutious that were moved? Witness :-[Turnresolutions that were moved? here, that was proing over his notes] I see one Witness :-[Turnposed by William StottSr GEGORY LEW
Witness:-William Stott then proposed the following resolution:-" That, from the statements
made before this delegate meeting, it is evident
that a tremendous majority in these great manufacturing districts are in favour d' the People's
Charter becoming the law of th- land; and, in
conformity with that opinion, it is at this stage
of the proceedings necessary thata definite decision should be come to relative to the future
course of action to e immediately adopted by
the working classes, stating or.again vesumed."
labour be further suspended, deinity whether

Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--oes it stop
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Any thing more?
and
have of Mr. Scholefield's. Now, agreed Yes. This motion was seconded
That isall I That is of Mr. Schoefeld's Now, there ? to. Well, was there a other resolution
have all I
moved and carried? Yes. Joseh Manary then
do you recollect any more that was said ?
Mr. BAINES :-He says

he cannot

under- moved:-" That the delegates

take to say from recollection what was said.

ere assembled

recommendtheirrespective consttifencies toadopt

Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Then I ask, whe- all legal means to carry into effect the People's

ther he can from memory state any thing else Charter, and that they send delgates to every
that was said ? Witness :-Merely that Mr.
Scholefield told them, that Mr. O'Connor and
his friends were meeting at some other place,
and that he was leaving the meeting to go and
join them. Did he say where they were meeting, or what they were meeting about. I don't
recollect. Did he then leave the meeting ? He
then left the meeting.

Now go back to the

meeting at the Hall of Science, which meeting
took place I think on the same day.

part of the united kingdom, to endeavour to get
the co-operation of the middle and labouring
classes to carry out the same; and that thley
stop work until it becomes the law of the land."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-- [Handing
in a paper to the Court.] Your Lordship will
find that to be a copy f both the xolutions.
th

The JUDGE :-Manary-is that the name of

Was there the mover ? Yes, my Lord, Ftrederick Taylor of

a resolution moved there ? There was.

What Royton, seconded the motion.

Is his name
Sir GREGORY LWIN
was the resolution about ? Who moved it ? The
first resolution was moved by Benjamin Stott.
Augustus Frederick Taylor, or Frederick Angustus Taylor, or Frederick Taylor-? He is someThe JUDGE :-When was this ? Witness:times called Frederick Taylor, and sometimes
On the 16th, at the meeting in the forenoon,
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-What was the Frederick Augustus Taylor. But Frederick is
resolution ? Witness:-" That this meeting do his most usual name ? Yes, sir.Cross-examined by 1Mr BAINES :- Just a
strongly recommend to all trades' societies, that,
from henceforth, they make political discussions word with you, Mr. Hanly. You say this tea
lawful and necessary in their assemblies; and that party was on the 16th, at Carpenters' Hall? It
they embody in their rules a law for the adoption was. Was that tea party advertised on the 6th
ef this great principle." This resolution was of August.

170
The JUDGE :-It is in evidence that there
was a tea party on that evening.
Mr. BAINES:-Is not that [Exhibiting a
placard] the placard by which the tea party was
advertised? I have no recollection of seeing that
placard before, nor in the way in which the tea
party was advertised, nor do I know at present
how I discovered that there was to be a tea party
on that occasion.
The JUDGE :-It is in evidence, that there
was but the one tea party on that evening- [To
the witness.] I suppose there was but the one tea
party? Witness:--There was only one tea party
that evening in Carpenters' Hall, my Lord.
Mr. BAINES :-Allow me to look at your
notes which you took on that occasion. You
said at first you took no notes. Allow me for a
moment to look at the notes. Witness hands a
note book to Mr. Baines.
Mr. BAINES :-You got in after the meeting
began ? Yes. Where then do your notes of the
meeting begin ? Just where you see the pencil
marks. Why, it is in short-hand ! Yes. Where
were you when you took these notes ?-Were
you near the chairman ? Yes, I was on the platform. And Mr. Scholefield was speaking when
you arrived? Yes. And that is what you heard?
Yes. The context you did not hear ?-He was
speaking you say at the time you entered? He
was.
Mr. MURPHY :--I have no question to ask
the witness.
Cross-examined by M'CARTNEY :-Have
you been reading that portion of the evidence respecting the meeting at Carpenters'
Hall, and the Hall of Science, from your own
votes, or from printed extracts from the Mant iester Guardian? I have the original notes
here, [Witness lays his hand on his note books]
but, for the sake of facility, I have been reading
from a copy which I have carefully made from
the notes. But that you gave in evidence, you
were reading from the printed slips ? Partly so.
I have availed myself of them wherever I found
them correct. The report in the Guardian was
furnished by myself.
The JUDGE:-He has been reading from the
notes-the written notes-and he has got the
originals.
WITNESS:-I will read the same thing from
the original short-hand notes, if you desire it.
M'CARTNEY:-On the 15th, the meeting,
you say, was held at Carpenters' Hall? Yes.
You attended ? I did. At what time of the
morning?
The JUDGE :-That is the first meeting at
Carpenters' Hall.
M'CARTNEY:-Yes, my Lord.

WITNESS :-At one o'clock the chair was
taken at Carpenters' Hall. The Hall was pretty
well crowded, I believe? No; there were none
there except delegates, as far as I could learn.
You were on the speaker's gallery, or platform ?
Yes. Did you see another gallery at the opposite
end of the hall ? I did. Now, was that gallery
crowded, or occupied ?-Whether was it crowded
or not ? If I have an account of it in my notes,
[Turning over the notes] I will rely on them;
but, speaking from recollection, I think there
were some parties representing themselves as delegates, and their credentials not being deemed
satisfactory, it was agreed that they should be
admitted to the gallery, but not allowed to take
any part in the proceedings. I find a passage
here which says:-" A discussion arose as to
whether those from the country, who neglected
to bring credentials, should be admitted to the
meeting; and it was finally agreed, that they
should be allowed to sit in the gallery, but should
not be permitted to take any part in the proceedings." There were very few persons in the gallery. Do you remember a motion being made
that all should be admitted whom the Hall could
conveniently hold ? I recollect you making that
motion at a meeting on the following day. You
said there was a dependence to be made on the
newspaper press, and that they might as well let
inthe public to witness the proceedings. That
motion however was not agreed to. I am ques.
tioning you with regard to the meeting on the
15th? Well, there was no such motion made at
that meeting, as far as I can recollect. You
were then in the capacity of reporter for the
Manchester Guardian? I was. Did you feel it
to be your duty as a reporter of that paper, to
take down verbatim all that transpired in your
presence? I did not. I felt it to be my duty as
reporter to give, in substance, a fair and impartial expression of what was done at the meeting,
but not, exactly, what was said, because I knew
the editor would not allow a verbatim report of
all the speeches of the delegates to be inserted.
My duty was merely to give a fair and substantial account of what was done.
M'CARTNEY :-Of what was done! But were
you not aware that speaking was all that was
done? I am aware of that, and I gave the substance of the speaking. But so many got up and
said the same thing over and over again, that I
could express in six lines, and have done so in
this report, what was said in two hours. (Laughter.) Do you remember in the Carpenters' Hall,
an application being made by the manager of that
Hall, for some person to go outside, and tell the
people who surrounded the Hall, to disperse and
go away, least their assembling might lead to a
breach of the peace, or to tumult, or disorder of

171
any kind, which the delegates were desirous of
using their influence to prevent ?Yes, I do.
The JUDGE-:-At which meeting was that ?
Witness :-The meeting on the 15th, at Carpenters' Hall.
M'CARTNEY :-And was the object of such
dispersion, lest the gathering outside might lead
to, or have a tendency to lead to, anything like
a breach of the peace,, or tumult? Yes, that was
the object. It was in consequence of a letter
from the mayor, calling on the meeting to disperse. This is a copy of theletter:-" Great inconvenience and danger to the public peace having arisen from the large bodies of persons who
have, on several occasions, assembled round the
Carpenters' Hall; and these assemblages having
been caused by the meetings held within the
Hall; the magistrates deem it right to draw your
attention to the effect of such meetings, and require you to discontinue all proceedings which
are necessarily attended with such illegal conse"Yours, &c.,
quences.
"WILLIAM NEILD,

MAYOR."

" Town Hall, Manchester,
15th August, 1842."
Are you aware, that, at some time of that day,
the magistrates and constabulary or some of the
officials connected with the magistracy, whose
duty it was to see that all riotous and tumultuous
assemblies should be instantly dispersed, are
you aware that they were in the vicinity of the
Hall that day ? I believe that that was the case,
though I do not know it of my own knowledge.
The JUDGE :-You don't know it? Witness :-It was so stated, my Lord.
M'CARTNEY :-Are you aware that all the
speeches on that occasion, invariably inculcated
the preservation of property, the conservation of
the peace, and respect for the constituted authorities ? Yes, as far as I recollect I believe that
was the case. Do you remember an application
being made at that meeting by any party ?
WITNESS -- What was the nature of the application ? Perhaps that would lead it to my recollection.
M'CARTNEY :.-Do you remember any parties coming into the Hall and requesting permission to say something relative to some intention
of some parties on the railings? No. You d-d
not? Did not notice a number of females at the
meeting ? No. In the gallery? No. Now, the
meeting of the 16th was at the Hall of Science ?
Yes,Iwillturntothatmeeting? Thatwasameeting
adjourned from the 15th Yes. And the meeting
Of the 15th, on its adjofinment, broke up peaceably and quietly, and all went publicly through
u
the streets from that meeting without anyiidi.
cation of disturbance being manifested at their.

breaking up? They left the room quietly, and I
did not see them afterwards ? Yes, but as far as
you saw, every thing was quiet and peacabIe?
It was. Then we come to the meeting of the
16th. At what hour did you attend at the Hall
of Science ? At half-past ten o'clock in the forenoon. Had the chair been taken on your ar.
rival? Alexander Hutchinson took the chair.
I was there at the commencement of the proceedings. You remember, I presume, (without referring to any particular address, speech, or
sentiment) that all the speeches delivered during
the meeting of the 16th, in the Hall of Science,
were of such a character as to preserve peace,
hold sacred property, and even to respect the
opinions of others ? No, they were not all of that
character. Generally ? Yes, generally they were,
but I remember one exception.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: -What was
that ? George Candelet advised them to go to the
hills and take the crops.
The JUDGE :-Is George Candelet here?Is he a defendant ?
MI'CARTNEY:-I know not, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Oh yes, my
Lord.
The JUDGE :-What do you mean by getting
the crops off the hills ?
WITNESS :-To take them into their possession and live on them.
M'CARTNEY :-1 think you remember no
such recommendation emanating from Mr. Candelet, which the general feeling of the meeting
went not to discountenance if not reprobate?
Witness :-I do not recollect any such circumstance, but I will refer to the place and see,
and give you the benefit of any such disclaimer
on the part of the meeting. If there was anything of the sort I should certainly have noticed it.
he
The ATTORNEY -GENERAL :-Was
turned out of the room? No. Witness then
turned to his notes and read as follows:"Candelet, from Hyde, said, there was plenty
of provisions for them on the hills-plenty of
good crops, with which they might supply their
wants; and he therefore implored the delegates
to resolve upon holding out until they obtained
the Charter. There were plenty of persons who
did no work, and yet they lived in affluence.
There were plenty of provisions in the country,
and no cause for fear in that respect."
The JUDGE :-I don't think that goes the
length of advising them to take the crops.
WITNESS:-My Lord, this was in reply to
an observation made by other parties, as to how

172
the turn-outs should support themselves.
I
shall read the context :-" The peopleof London
manifested great sympathy with the working;
classes engaged in the present movement. When
themilitary were leaving London the people
the military were leaving London the'people

from you now, but it wille a matter of observation for the jury.
-Were t'CARTNEY:
there any reporters
present besides you? Threere.--think Griffin was there. Mr. Grant was also present. And
were so clamorous that the band were ordered some others connected with th Manchester
press, I suppose? Yes. Do you remember the
to 'strike up, in order to drown the noise of the di rs
etinDoth e
b the
p.opulace. He recommended the working classes magistrates ? Yes
to imitate the ancient Romans, who retired to a
The JUDGE :-Beswick came ? Yes, my
hil, and refused to return to their labour until Lord. You were present then ? I was, my Lord.
their political rights were conceded to them. On the 16th, he came to the Hall of Science, I
Charles Stuart, the secretary, stated that many believe? Yes, my Lord, at the afternoon meetof the proprietors of mills were favourable to the ing; there were two meetings that day. At what
movement, and willing to subscribe to support time ? About five o'clock in the afternoon, as
those engaged in it, provided they looked for nearly as I can recollect. The meeting broke up
their political rights. He did not approve of at six in the afternoon?
M'CARTNEY: -As soon as the meeting
confining the agitation to the question of an advance of wages.-Jenkinson, fron Lees, sttedtrates that the delegates should disperse, they
Vaie of wages.-Jenkinson, fro Lees, stated ascertained, that it was the opinion of the magisthat the body he represented were willing to manifested a desire to depart instantly ; the men
cease from labour, until the wages were ad- got up, took their hats, and prepared to leave the
vanced; but, if the agitation were employed Hall ? As soon as their business was done, they
for political objects, they were determined to left, but the chairman objected to go away, and,
return to their work.-A delegate stated, that, if declared distinctly, that the magistrates had no
they once agreed to go for the Charter, though authority to disperse them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-The mahe could not say from what source they might
derive assistance, he was confident they would gistrates had no authority to disperse them!
WITNE
be well supported.-Robert Gardner, representative of the engravers and printers of Man- to go away.
1 The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-What did
chester, denounced as foolish and insane the they do in these ten minutes? They passed those
they do in these ten minutes ? They passed those
recommendation to the working classes not to resolutions which I have read respecting the
return to their labour till they obtained the Charter.
Charter. He was a Chartist to the backbone ;
The JUDGE :-What resolutions?
but he thought the people could not maintain
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Did they
themselves for a period sufficiently long to ena- pass the resolutions you before mentioned ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-In the five minutes? About
ble them to obtain the Charter. He believed,
that our commercial restrictions were not only that time, my Lord.
M'CARTNEY: - The meeting quietly disthe cause of the prevailing distress, but also the
great hindrance to the obtainment of the Char- persed you say, and walked away, without any
indication of disturbance in the neighbourhood?
ter; and concluded by moving an amendment They did as far as I know.
to that effect, which was seconded by Neild, a
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENE.hatter." Candelet then used the language I RAL :-Those are your original notes, (Pointing
have read.
to them) and I believe this is a copy ? Witness:
M'CARTNEY: - Read Candelet again ?Yes, this is a copy, and I have the original
Witness :-" Candelet from Hyde, said, " there notes here for any one that desires them.
were plenty of provisions for them on the hills,The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I will now
plenty of good crops, with which they might call a few witnesses to show what took place after
supply their wants; and he therefore implored the 17th and 18th.
the delegates to resolve upon holding out until
MATTHEW MAIDEN, examined by Mr.
they obtained the Charter. There were plenty HILDYARD:-What are you ? I am a consta"
a y
of persons who did no 'ork, and yet they lived in ble of Ashton.
Were you at the Town Hall of
affluence ; there were plenty of provisions in the
Ashton, the 18th of August ? I was. Did a
country, and no cause for fear in that respect."
M'CARTNEY : - I submit that that bears mob of persons come i' the Town Hall? Yes.
Were they armed ? Yes. When was that ? On
no such construction, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-We cannot hear any speech Thursday, the 18th of August. Do you know

173
Robert Lees ? Yes. Where was he? He was
eading them up. They went to Mr. Barrow's
new buildings, where there were .some bricklayers and labourers at work. Did they desire
them to desist? Yes. I believe there was a person of the name of Meath at the head of the
bricklayers ? Yes. Did Meath refuse to suffer
the men to desist from their work ? A brother of
the master of the buildings was there, and he refused to let the men give up working. In consequence of that did a riot ensue ? There did.
Did they succeed in making the men desist from
their work? They did give up. Was the riot
act read? It was. Was Lees armed with a
stick ? He had a stick in his band.
Cross-examined by JOHNSTON:-What do
you mean by a riot ? There was a disturbance.
You mean by a riot a disturbance ? Yes, the
shopkeepers began putting the shutters up. Do
?
you call that a riot Yes, they brandished their
sticks, and requested the people to give up working and come down, or they would fetch them
down. And that is what you call a riot ? Yes.
Cross-examined by WOODRUFFE :--Didthey
brandish their sticks previous to the riot act
being read ? Yes, they brandished their sticks,
and said if they would not come down they
would make them come.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord,
will you take a note of that ?
The JUDGE:-I have already done so.
WOODRUFE :--Did you see any disturbauce, or any person injured previous to the
riot act being read? No.
SAMUEL NEWTON, examined by Mr. POLLOCK:-Were you at Ashton on the 18th of
August ? I was. Were you at Otho Hulme's
mill there ? Yes. Do you remember seeing
any people come to it? I do. What time did
they come first ? About ten o'clock in the forenoon. How many people came? I should
think about three hundred came altogether.
Had they anything in their hands ? They had
sticks, and other weapons of various kinds,
Was the mill at work when they came? It
was. What did they say? They desired the
master and overlooker to stop the works. The
overlooker said the old master was not there
(that is the eldest brother,) and they could do
nothing-they could not stop the works. Was
the mill, in fact, stopped.there, or not ? Not at
that time. Did the people go away? They
did. Did they say anyt.ing as they were going
away? Yes-" come on, we have not force

enough here; let's go and fetch the others"
When didthey come back again? Some came
about twelve o'clock, and others about two
hours afterwards. flow many came the second
time ? I think there could not be less than
nine hundred; they came up in a body. What
did they say the second time they came? They
walked forward up to the mill, and insisted on
its being stopped, and the hands turned out.
Were the hands turned out ? Yes. After the
hands were turned out, what did you see ?
Theywanted the young master to promise thathe
would not start working any more; and he said,
as long as the hands were willing to work the
mill must run. Now, after that, what did you
see the mob do ? They began to pull the fires
out, and there was a call from the mob to pull
the plugs from the boiler, so as to let the water
out. Did they do so ? They did. They pulled
the plugs out. They drew one plug, and one
fire, and then the soldiers came up and dismissed the mob.
JAMES WHITHAM, examined by the AT.
TORNEY-GENERAL :-Where do you live Y
In Carleton. Where is that ? Near Yorkshire.
Is that near Colne ? Yes, ten miles from Colne.
Is that near Skipton? Yes, about two miles
from Skipton. On the 16th of August did any
persons stop any works at Skipton? Yes.
Were you there ? Yes. Did you see them?
Yes. How many were there? Two or three
thousand. Whose works did they stop ? Mr.
Duhert's and Mr. Sedgewick's. Did Sedgewick's make any resistance ? Yes. For how
long ? An hour, or better. When did it end ?
-What became of it ? The special constables
stopped the mob, till another reinforcement of
the mob came up, and then they stopped the
works by force. Did they overpower Sedgewick's people? They did. What did the mob
do? They stopped the mills when the reinforcement came up, they pulled the tap out of
the boiler, and turned out the hands. Was the
riot act read before that was done? It was.
Do you know a man of the name of Mooney ?
Yes, very well. Where does hlielive? At
Colne. Did he ever tell you any thing about
his going from Colne to Manchester? Yes.
What did he tell you? He told me, that he
had been at the Manchester conference, as a
a delegate. As a what ? As a delegate. Did
he mention where they met ? At Carpenters'
Hlall. Any where else ? They broke up from
there, he said, and went tU Schiolefield's place.

174

Did he ever mention any meqting at ChAtMoss?& you never sell tea? Never, in my life time.
enYes, he mentioned a few of them, who met Come, sir, will you swear that you were not
gaged in'selling tea at that time? Yes, I will
there, in an outside place. Did he say on what
engage to swear, that I never was engaged in
day it was ? It was some time after the meetselling any tea in all-my life time.
ing broke up at Scholefield's place. Did they
CHARLES SLORACK, examined by Mr,
tell you what they had with them? Yes, they WORTLEY:-Were you employed in August,
said they were all prepared, and if any thing last as a designer, in Messrs. Wankley's works ?
had gone to break them up, they would oppose Yes. Where were you so employed? In Ashton,
force to force. Had they any means of doing Now, on the 8th of August, do you remember a
so? Yes, they said they had four double- mob coming to your premises ? Yes. Did they
turn your hands out on that day ? Yes, sir. How
barrelled guns, and two or three single ones.
JAMES MOONEY, a defendant: - My long did they :continue out? They went to work
on Tuesday morning again, and about half-past
Lord, I wish to ask the witness a question.
The JUDGE :-I thought Mooney had eleven o'clock they stopped us again. After
Tuesday the 9th, we stopped out till Monday the
counsel.
MOONEY :-I only want to ask a question. 22nd of August; and we worked Monday and
The JUDGE :-I cannot permit you; Where Tuesday quietly, but on Wednesday the mob
came on a sudden to the factory, broke open the
is your counsel ?
gates, and ran down the yard; the hands were
MOONEY :-He is not present.
The JUDGE:-Well, if you wish to ask any greatly alarmed. How many were there in that
mob, that came on Wednesday the 24th ? Upquestions I will not hinder you.
MOONEY :-When was it I told you this? wards of 400 or 500 came to the gates, but there
In the latter end of August. Can't you recollect were thousands about. Were the gates fastened?.
the day? No. It is a strange thing you can't Yes, sir. Was anything done to them ? They
recollect the day ? Don't you recollect when were broken down. Did they do any other mischief? They did the other two besides that. What
we came out together from the news room ?
MOONEY :-Was there any one with us? other two? Two smaller gates. Where there two
Witness:-There was no one with us except one sets of gates broken? Yes, and one small: door.
person who told you something about Scotland. Were these gates broken down that evening
Yes. Did they get to the mill at all? They did
At what time of the day was it ?
The JUDGE:-[-To Mooney.] Your coun- not go into the mill on Wednesday, there was a
shout got up not to go in. They attempted to
sei is nere now, out you may go on if you like.
MOONEY :-As my counsel is here, I wish go into the engine house, but the doors of it were
locked. When they got round to it, they began
him to ask some questions too.
The JUDGE :-You must leave that to his to throw stones through the windows, and some
own discretion. You may go round to him if stones got into the wheels of the engine through
you please. His Lordship then read to Mr. the windows. While they were doing that what
McOubrey (Mooney's counsel) what had been happened ? the magistrates and constables came,
and they were stoned by the same mob. Did
given in evidence by the last witness.
Cross-examined by Mr. McOUBREY:-How the military come up ? Yes, about ten minutes
came Mooney to say such a thing to you? We after, the military came, and then the mob ran
were- talking together. Had you been particu- off and dispersed in all directions. That was on
larly intimate? Yes, I had known him a long the 24th, was it? Yes. And they dispersed?
time. Now, what was it that led to such a dis- Yes. Was that the last time they came ? Yes:
closure as that ?-Were you a Chartist yourself ? [The foreman, on behalf of the jury, requested
Yes; I once was. Did you say, at one time, you permission to retire for refreshment, and were
were? Yes, I was joined at one time. How told that they would be allowed to do so at two
have you been getting your living ?-What trade o'clock.]
GRATTAN M'CABE, examined by Sir
are you? I am a weaver, sir. Have you been in
employment lately? Yes. Are you still a weaver? GREGORY LEWIN :-You were SuperintenYes, I am a weaver now. Do you do anything dent of police at Burnley, I understand? Yes,sir.
else ? No, I don't do anything else. In what Did you apprehend Beesley? Yes. Where did
employment were you at the time you say you you apprehend him? In Burnley. When ? On
lid this conversation with Mooney ? I had gone the 3rd of September. When you apprehended
over to Colne for a reed. I dare say you have a him did you search him? I did, sir. Did you
great respect for the laws? Witness :-Respect find anything upon him? I did. What did you
find? Aresoluition of the delegates. Have yoi
far.the laws'?
M McQUBREY ;- Yes, have you?-Did any copies there? -Yes. [Witness producing a

175
small hand-bil.] Open it out. Witness then
handed the bill to the counsel, who put it in, and
it was read by the officer of the court. The following is a copy:-" Resolution of the delegates.
-That whilst the Chartist body did not originate
the present cessation from labour, this conference
of delegates from various parts of England, express their deep sympathy with their constituents,
the working men now on strike; and that we
strongly approve the extention and the continuance of their present struggle till the People's
Charter becomes a legislative enactment, and
decide forthwith to issue an address to that effect;
and pledge ourselves, on our return to our respective localities, to give a proper direction to
the people's efforts. (Signed) JAMES ARTHUR,
Chairman; J. ARRAN,

Secretary."

I found

seventeen copies of this resolution on Beesley, I
have fifteen copies here, and I gave two to the
solicitor. The whole of my division, comprising
forty-five townships, was then in a very agitated
state. When was that ? From the 10th to the
20th, previous to the apprehension of the prisoner; about the time of the strike. The millhands were turned out in Burnley on the 13th,
and an attempt was made, on the 15th, to stop a
coal pit,-the Habergham Eave's coal pit. I
understood that two magistrates and some dragoons dispersed the mob. Were there any placards exhibited on the walls ? There was. There
is one here which is a copy of the Executive Placard. It was hanging on a lamp-post in the
centre of Burnley. [Witness produces the placard.] When did you take that down? On the
18th. Were there any others similar to that on
the walls? None others. This is the only one
you saw? Yes. It was surrounded by a lot of
men, and I tore it down. There was one of these
resolutions posted up (on the 19th or 20th, I
think,) on a wall, a number of men were reading
it, and I tore it down.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Do you
recollect large meetings being held previously to
these in Bnrnley? Yes. Did you attend any
meeting that I attended at Burnley ? No, sir, I
did not. Were you not at a meeting which I
addressed in a tent ? I stopped outside the tent
for about ten minutes. Did you hear anything
that I said? I did not hear you say anything.
You did not hear the tenour of my address ? No.
Upon your oath ? No, I went to see the constables, and just passed by the tent. You mean the
pavilion that was erected for the tea-party ? Yes.
Do you mean to say that you did not gQ in to
hear the addresses? Yes. Are you aware, Mr.
MCabe, that the shopkeepers of Barnley had as
thr caled by placard? I know there
~
weei

was a placard calling a meeting. Did you attend that meeting? I did not. Did you attend a
meeting where the shopkeepers of Burnley adopted the People's Charter? I read something of
the resolutions adopted at that meeting; I saw
them posted on a wall. Have you any recollection of what passed at those meetings? I have
not a perfect recollection of what passed. Did
not you get some of these meetings reported? Yes,
I had most of the other speakers reported but not
you. Oh, then you had reported the others but not
me ? No, not you. Did you report them yourself?
No, not myself, when I attended the Chartist
camp meetings, it was more for the purpose of
seeing the numbers in attendance than reporting
Then you attended the other
the speeches.
meetings, but you did not report my speech ?
Oh! no; I got others to report the speeches.
And why not report my speech? It was too
difficult. Did you put your nose in at all to
hear me? No. Don't blush; you are an Irishman and don't blush. Did you ever see a greater
inclination on the part of any meeting to preserve the most perfect order? To tell you the
truth, the impression on my mind was, that the
procession in Burnley was really a contemptible
one to what I was led to believe it would be.
That is, you thought it was small in number?
Yes. Are you in the habit of seeing larger processions in Burnley ? That procession did not
come up to my ideas. Then no procession you
ever saw there came up to your ideas of what a
Chartist procession ought to be ? No. We expected the meeting would be a much larger one.
We expected more disturbance and were prepared for it; but when we saw how they entered
Burnley, we were perfectly satisfied that there
would be no disturbance. You are constable of
Burnley? Yes. And you were prepared for the
disturbance? Yes. Then why not go and hear
what was heard ? -Now, on your oath, were you
not outside the meeting on horseback ? No!
not there on horseback during the day. And
you got reports of what everybody said but me ?
No, I did not get it taken down. Nor you did
not receive it from any of those who sent in reports? No.
ISSACCHAR THORPE sworn The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-The object
of calling two or three witnesses now is merely
to prove, that licenses were given on certain
occasions to parties to carry on their works, I
wish to apprise my learned friends that that is
the last point.

Examined by Mr. HILDYARD:--Are you
the manager of Print-works in Stalybridge, be*onging to Neild and Company? Yes. Were
your works stopped on the 8th of August last?
Yes.Our works are in Duckinfield, and not
in Stalybridge. Had you reason to believe that
a party of persons were sitting in Stalybridge
granting authority under particular circumstances
to the masters to work for a particular time ?
did not see them myself. Had you reason to
believe from information you received, that such
a body was sitting ? Yes. Did you, in consequence, on Wednesday, 10th August, go to Stalybridge, and ask an interview with a party there,
which you understood was granting this permission ? Yes.
The JUDGE :-Pray speak out. You went to
them on the 10th of August ? Yes.
Mr. HILDYARD :-Did you go on horseback ?
No, sir. Did you see any one there when you
made this application ? Yes, I saw a room full
of people. And saw a person there very busy
going about to whom you addressed yourself?
Yes. What did you ask him ? I askld him if he
was one of the committee.
Mir.MURPHY :-Who was that?
Mr. IHILDYARD :-A person that hesaw more
aqtive than the others.
The ,JUDGE :-What did you ask him ?
Witness ?-I asked him, was he one of the committee. What answer did you receive? He
said, he was. Did you tell him what object you
had in seeking an interview with the committee ?
I did I told him we wanted to gain the power
of working up the cloth. Did he tell you that
he "Would see the committee and then return to
youiagain ? Yes. Did you in consequence wait
at a house called "The Moulders' Arms"? I did.
After waitng a certain time, did that person
together with three others come to you? Yes,
What did they say ? They brought me a small
piece of paper, which purported to grant us permission. Just look at that paper, (handing a
paper to witness] and see if that is the paper
which was brought to you? Yes, sir, this is the
sar4e paper.
Mr. HILDYARD:-Very well, sir. Perhaps
it had better be read now. The paper was put in
and read. It was as follows ;-" We, the Committee of Stalybridge, think it our duty to allow
you every protection in our power to finish the
pieces already in danger, but we will not go beyond that point."
"On behalf of the Committee,
"To the Duckinfield Bleach Works."

Mr. HILDYARD:-Now, after you received
that paper, did you go away ?-And were your
works allowed to go on till the pieces were finished ? Yes. When you finished the pieces, did
your works cease ? Yes. For how long were
your works suspended? For seven or eight days.
Cross-examined by Mr O'CONNOR :-What
do you mean by this committee that were sitting ?
I don't know what they were. You went to this
committee yourself, not knowing what this committee was ? No. Do you recollect what this
committee said to you? No. Well, I will refresh
your memory. - "He was astonished at the
apathy of the Metropolis on this subject. Would
the people never learn to rely upon their own
energy, and demand to be fed themselves, while
they feed others ? It appeared to him, thatthe
time was passed for talking. The time was come
to do something, and he thought they ought to
proceed at once to appoint a committee of public
safety."
The JUDGE:-What is all this? Witness:I don't know what you are referring to.
Mr. O'CONNOR: - Then you went to a
committee of public safety, and you don't know
what it is ?
PETER JAMIESON, examined by the
ATTORNEY- GENERAL :- Where do -you
live ? In Stalybridge. What are you ? A Tailor.
Do you remember, at the latter end of July,
discharging some of your working men ? Yes;
some men I had taken into the house to work,
who had been previously working in their own
houses. On the 10th of August, did any number
of persons come to your house ? Yes. How
many do you think ? I suppose their might be
from sixty to seventy. What did they do? They
ordered me to turn eut my men. Now, at that
time, had you -any particular work that was
wanted very much ? I had some mourning. You
say they ordered you to turn off your men, Did
they do anything besides ? No. Did they come
into your house ? A number of them came into
the shop. And what did they do ? They told me
I must turn out my men. Did you do so ? Yes,
I did. What became of you? Well, I went to a
place that was reported either to bean operatives'
meeting room, or a committee room. Where
was it held? In Duckingfield; in a house at the
back of the Moulders' Arms. Did you see a
horse there ? Yes, there was a horse at the door
when I went in. How many persons did you
find in the room ? There might be from forty to
fifty. Now, did you tell them what work you
were upon ? I went and told them that I had
heard that our shop had been reported, at the
meeting held on the Haigh, as bating the wages,
and that such a report was false; and I wished
them to call my work-people there, and4would

177
bi
id- persons atercy ydIit w-k iing mentioned? Yes.
a-l
I
answer for it. Who do
people ? Them that I had discharged attke hitter wards come to your premises to seebwhat you
end of July. Did you say anything about the qwere doing ? Yes, there was. Whatdid they do ?
mourning ? Not at that time. Did you after- They sent persons to examine the work that the
wards, on the same day, inthe afternoon ? Yes. men were "agait" upon, to show them that it
told them I should like was mourning. Did they challenge him, that he
What did you say ? -I
thema to go on with the wbrk. Was this in the was getting work done that was not mourning ?
same room ? Yes. But I could not swear it was Yes, they told him that there was a jacket there
the: same people when I went the second time. that some one had been recently sowing. 1D
Tell me whether you knew any of them either in any of them make any observation on that, thit
the morning or afternoon? I could not swear it was not mourning? No, nothing more. Afte
who was on the committee. - There was one of that, did any other persons come? No; my master
the name of Fenton there-What Fenton is he ? said it would be better to turn them off, and let
James Fenton: he is a shoemaker by trade, and the work be taken home to be finished, and have
lives at Stalybridge. Did you see a man of the no more disturbance.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-You
name of Durham there ? I did. Was he in the
committee room ? Yes. Now, what Durham is are now a master tailor? Yes. You had of course
that ? - What is he ? He is a shoemaker, and been a journeyman tailor? Never in England.
lives in Stalybridge. Did Fenton take any part Did you ever belong to the union of the trades ?
in the matter ?-Did he say anything? Yes. Not in England. Are you aware that there were
Was your business settled that day, or did you go unions of your own trade in England? Yes, but
the next day ? I went on the morning of the they struck against the men in my employment,
11th. Did you see Fenton there ? I did. Was because I considered they had men who used me
he taking any part in the business ? Witness :- badly. Well, it was a tailor, and one of your
own men, that took back this bit of paper? Yes.
What ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - Did you Now, do you know Durham? Yes. Have you
hear him say or do anything ? He said on the not often praised him for his kindness, mildness,
morning of the 10th, he could not enter into any and quietness? Yes, and I have assisted him in
business, as they had business of importance to his distress.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-That is all, my Lord.
transact. Well, was that the reason why he came
the next day ? No, I ordered them to call my [To Witness.] You did not stop a man from
working at this jacket thatwas not mourning ?
men there.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Never mind No.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENEspeaking about your men. I am speaking about
the morning of the 11th. Did you see any other RAL :--Did they make any objection to working
person come when you were there ?-Did you see at that jacket? The man was not at work on the
any other person come about the print works? jacket then, but they said there was some person
There was a person brought in a message, from recently at work at it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-And that
a man who waited at the door, wanting some
further time about finishing his work. Was that it was not mourning? Yes. And did they object
stated in the committee room, in the hearing of to that work bAng done ?
The JUDGE :-That is a matter of inference.
all the people there ? Yes. That there was a man
WILLIAM BARKER, examined by the ATwanting longer time to finish his work? Yes.
What kindof work was it ? I don't know. How- TORNEY-GENERAL:-Were you in the serever, you heard that message delivered? Yes, vice of Jamieson last August ? Yes. Do you rethat message was delivered. Did you ever get a member going to a committee room, and getting
piece of paper from the committee ? I did not get a bit of paper? Yes. What day was it ? On
it, I had it sent to me. You had it sent to you ? Thursday morning.
The JUDGE :-That is the morning of the
Yes. Who brought it? A man in my employ11th of August? Witness :- I don't know, it
ment. What is his name? William Barker.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I shall call was on Thursday, I recollect perfectly well. The
him next, to prevent any objection being taken Thursday after you were turned out ? Witnow. [To Witness.] A paper was brought to ness :- We were turned out on Wednesday
you? Yes. What became of that paper? It was morning.
The JUDGE :-Well, that is the Thursday
lost. Have you been able to find it? No. Do
you recollect what was the contents of it? I could afterwards.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Where did
not say, I only read it once. Well, what was it
about? That our men were to go on with their you get the paper ? From the committee sitting at
work, and finish the mourning.

Was the mourn- the Moulders' Arms.

Did you say anything

178
about it ? I told them my master had a suit of trimmings."-(laughter). Is that what you call
"cabbage??"-(great laughter). No, n w'tso
mourning to be made for a person. I told them
But your master being a
to give us a note to allow us to make this good.-(laughter.)
" swell," you wanted something soft on which to
mourning.
Mr. DUNDAS :-I object to this. I under- carry the swill? I defy you or any other man to
stood from the Attorney-General, that none of charge me.
The JUDGE :-He put rags in his hat to keep
the defendants were present at that meeting
at all.
the swill from pressing his head.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:- No, my
Mr. O'CONNOR :---Who charged you with
Lord, the witness did not say that.
that ? A man who said I was taking spare trimThe JUDGE :-No. he says, "two of the demings away. Jamieson never charged me with
fendants were present."
WITNESS :-My master had a suit of mourn- it. Were you threatened to be brought before
ing to make for a funeral. I took his compli- the Magistrates for it ? I was threatened to be
ments, and said, he would be obliged if they brought before an attorney. But you see I am
would allow him a note to show the mob when not brought to justice yet. (laughter)
they came to the door, to allow us to make them.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Why that was worse than
The answer I got was, that the present com- to be brought before all the justices in the counmittee agreed to give him their note. Well, did try. Now I will let you know,that as you are in
they give you a bit of paper? Yes, sir. Did you the Attorney-General's hands, you may go down.
read it? I don't know whether I read it or not.
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
I gave it to Jamieson. Well, the paper you got
-Is Jamieson, your master here? Yes, sir. Did
you took to Jamieson? Yes, sir.
he ever make any complaints of that sort against
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-You
went into a room at the back of the you ? Not yet. Are you in his employment
say you
Moulders' Arms? Yes. Was that called the now? No. When did you leave him? A week
Operatives' Committee room? I believe it was. last Monday.
Was it a room used from time to time, by the
JAMES ROTHWELL, examined by Sir
Operatives for their committee meetings ? I don't GREGORY LEWIN:-Are you in the employ
know that, sir. Did you know anything about of Messrs. Hollingworth, of Dalton? Yes. I
that room, or the use to which it was applied bebelieve on the 10th of August their mill was
fore this time? No, I can't say. Are you and stopped ? Yes. On the 12th, in consequence of
your masters on good terms? For anything I
anything you heard respecting Mr. Potter, did
know, we are. You have always been on good
you go to make any application to anybody for a
terms ? Yes, always. You were never found
did you go to, and to
fault with by him for anything? No. You never license ? Yes. Where
at
got 21. 5s. from any one lately ? Yes, I got it for whom? I went on the 11th to a meeting
being in Liverpool. Did you get any since ? No. Whinberry Hill, in the parish of Glossop. And
You never had any falling out on that score? when you got to this Whinberry Hill who did you
No. Have you ever been charged with any see, to make an application to? The Chairman.
offence by him? No, not by him. Then it was Do you know who he was? John Lewis. Do
not the master, but the men who accused you? you kaow where he belongs to? Woollybridge.
Yes. What did they accuse you of ? For putWhat did you say to him? I told him ve had
ting two or three rags in my hat. Is that what
some work spoiling. Yes. I asked him for perthey call "cabbage ?" Yes. Some of the men
mission for two days to work it up. On making
taking two or three "rags"
charged me with
John Lewis do? He put
from the shopboard, but they couldn't prove it. that request what did
fa,
Is that all ? Yes, I have never been brought to it to the meeting. Was it carried in your
justice yet for it. Well, you are brought to your ? Yes, it was carried in our favour. Did
justice now for it. Is not that what they call you obtain any written license ? No. Did you
cabbage? Yes. Then you had got some of this work the two days? Yes. And did you then
cabbage in your hat ? Yes. Now, what did you cease? We then ceased.
The works in the
take these rags for ? To put in my hat to carry a neighbourhood, I believe, were standing? I besmall bundle on. What! was your head soft? lieve they were all standing.
I put 'em in to carry some swill on. (Laughter).
GEORGE ROBERTS, examined by Mr.
What sort of swill? Swill for pigs. Was it your
WORTLEY :-I believe you are the book-keeper
?-Was it your's ?-(laughter). It was
own swill
of Messrs. Potter? Yes. They have print works ?
bought and paid for. Now, these rags. What
men saythey were "spare Yes. Were your hands turned out in August
were they ?-The other

179
last? Yes. In consequence of something you
eard from Issachar Thorpi did yago to Stalybridge on horseback? Yes. Didyou go upstairs at the Moulders' Arms ? I did. Did you
tie your horse at the door ? I did. The Moulders' Arms are at Stalybridge, are they ? Yes.
What did you do when you went up-stairs ? I
asked for the committee room, and was shown
into it. What did you see there? I saw a number of persons sitting in the room; perhaps onethird of the room was full. Very well; what
application did you make to them ? I made an
application for leave to finish some warps we had
then in press, the same as Jamieson. What was
said ?
Mr. ATHERTON :-My learned friend, Wortley, is asking this witness what was said when he
went into the room ? Now, I object to that evidence being given, unless before the evidence is
given, some of the defendants are shewn to have
been present. Undoubtedly, the former witness
spoke to some of them, and said there was a
horse at the door. But that is no proof that the
meeting spoken to by the former witness is identical with this, or that it was held on the same
question.
The JUDGE:-It does not signify whether
the defendants were there or not, it is enough to
prove that there is a committee sitting to grant
licenses.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-IIhave shown
that two of the defendants were on that committee, and on that day.
Mr. WORTLEY :-You applied for permission
to finish the work you had in process ? Yes;
a great part of the committee I was informed
were then out at a large meeting, which was being-held at Stalybridge, and I was told ifI came
inr an hour and a half [ should get my answer:
I went again in an hour and a half, I went to
the upper part of the room, where there was a
chairman and a secretary; the latter was finishing a paper he was then writing, I received that
paper [handing a paper to the counsel]. Is
that yours? It is. In consequence of that did
you proceed with the goods in process ? Yes,
we began the following morning (Friday). After
receiving this license you began to work, did
you? We began to work on the following morning. Were you afterwards interrupted in working?
Not particularly so; we expected a mob to come
about noon the following day. Well, what happened then? We commenced again the following

morning. How came you to commence again ?Did any one come to you, 1po, not themob;
another person came from, the committee. Had
you seen him before ? No, had not seen him
before.
The JUDGE :-You then worked up what
you had ? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. WORTLEY :-During the time you were
working it up, did you see John Lewis? Yes.
Do you know him? Yes. Where did you see
him ? About half a mile from the place.
The paper obtained by witness from the corn
mittee was then put in and read; the following
is copy:-" This is to certify, that the Stalya
bridge committee of operatives have, upon the
representation of Messrs. Potters and Co. of
Dinting-vale print works, that a quantity of cloth
is in process; we, the committee, give them
leave to finish the present cloth, but no fresh to
be entered up. (Signed) The Committee.Aug. 11th, 1842.
Cross-examined by Mr. ATHERTON :-Did
you know anything before the time you went to
this committee room, of the committee room
itself, or how it had been used previously? No,
I did not.
HENRY RHODES, examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Where do you live ? In
Duckenfield. Are you a steam-loom weaver? I
was so in August last. Do you remember having
anything to do with the works of Mr. Robinson,
of Duckinfield ? Yes.
Were you employed
there? Yes. When were they stopped? On
Monday, the Sthof August, the mill was stopped.
How are Robinson's mills worked? They are
turned by two engines and a water-wheel. Did
this waterwheel do any other service besides
turning Robinson's works? It did, at that time.
What did it do? It pumped water up for the
inhabitants of Duckinfield. Well, on Thursday,
the 11th of August, did you set the water-wheel
to work for the purpose of supplying the inhabitants with water ? Yes. At what time of the
day was it ? A little after breakfast-time, it
might be nine o'clock. Did you go on pumping
up water?. No, the wheel was stopped. Who
stopped it ? Well, it was stopped by persons
concerned in these disturbances. I was told the
wheel was employed in furthering the mechanics'
work, and the mob would have it stopped. The
people came and insisted on our stopping it. Is
that so ? Yes. Did you go to any committee ?
I went down to the mill to see what it was
stopped for, and the master and manager told

180o
me that 1 should go on no more till such time
as I got a note from the committee; I asked
them, what committee I should go to, and the
master told me, that I should go to the committee at Hall-green. How far is that? About
one mile. Did you go to the committee? I
did. Were they sitting in a room ? Yes. Who
did you find there ? There was about a dozen of
men there. Did you know any of them ? I knew
about five of them. They suffered at Chester ?
Were they people concerned in the strike ? Yes.
Did you know any of them as being concerned
in the turn-out? I can't speak to their being
concerned in turning out hands, but I can speak
to their being in that room. Did you know a
person named Wilde ? Yes. What Wilde is that ?
William Wilde, who is now in Chester Castle.
Did you make an application? Yes, I made an
application.
The JUDGE :--Is this a different committee?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-It is, my
Lord, a different committee from the previous
one.
Mr. McOUBREY :-None of the defendants
are there, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-None of the
parties there are defendants; this committee, my
Lord, stands apart from the other, and is not
charged with any act of violence.
The JUDGE :-I think, then, it is as well not
to give their acts in evidence as none of the parties
there are defendants.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:-I am extremely happy to say, my Lord, that that is the
case for the prosecution,
The JUDGE :-As to some of the defendants,
no evidence has been adduced to convict them in
some of the counts in this indictment, especially
as to the counts for riot; if you wish to press
for a joint conviction, on all the counts, then
there is no evidence to show that some of the
defendants did as is here charged, unlawfully
conspire with divers other evil disposed persons,
unknown between the 1st of August, and the 1st
of October last, and caused to be brought together divers unlawful assemblies, and, in a formidable and menacing manner, compel divers of
her Majesty's peaceful subjects then employed in
their respective trades to desist, and depart from
their work, &c.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Allow me to
suggest, my Lord, that in a case of misudemeanor
it is not at all necessary that all the defendants
should be convicted upon every count in the indictment.

The JUDGE :-No; but you cannot have an
indictment for a misdemeanor against A., B., C.,
-say for obtaining money by false pretences, and
upon that indictment convict A. of one offence,
B. of another, and C. of a third.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
will just state what did occur before Lord Denman, when I took this very objection. Some
persons were indicted for a conspiracy to obtain
money, and there was also a count for obtaining
false evidence; and some of the defendants were
convicted upon one count and some upon another.
Lord Denman certainly ruled, that, in a case for
misdemeanor, it was perfectly competent to
convict on separate counts. Take, for instance,
the case of a riot and assault. Suppose there
were two counts in the indictment, one for riot,
the other for assault, and a number of defendants
were brought before the court charged with both;
his Lordship ruled, that some might be convicted
upon the first, and some upon the second count;
that it was not necessary that they should be all
convicted of both. I brought that before the
court afterwards, and Lord Denman's ruling was
approved of.
The JUDGE :-But suppose that some who
were convicted on the first count were convicted
on the other also.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
that was exactly the case. Some were convicted
of all. Others were convicted along with the
first (who participated in the whole) upon the
first count only; and others on the second count
only; and I think this present case furnishes a
strong illustration of the importance of that
ruling. One of these counts is for a riot. You
know, my Lord, that a riot is essentially different
from attending unlawful meetings and conspiring,
and the punishment may be different. Itake it,
my Lord, that some of these defendants'may be
found guilty on that count, and others not.
The JUDGE -Which is the count for riot?
Mr. MURPHY :-The last count,: my Lord,
the 9th.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I admit,
my Lord, at once, to take a prominent case,
that as to Mr. Scholefield for instance, there is
no pretence for saying that he took part in a
riot; yet I apprehend, that some of the defendants may be guilty of riot under that last count.
The JUDGE :-There is plenty of evidence
against some of them for an unlawful assembly.
Mr. BAINES:-Give me leave to state how
this case opened. My learned friend, the Attorney-General, expressly said, in his speech, on
opening the case, that the real question in this
case was, whether all or any of the defeUdAnt

181
were or were not engaged in the common purpose of endeavouring to effect a change in the
laws and constitution of this land, by taking advantage of the strike, and causing others to
out who would otherwise have stayed in. We,
on the part of the defendants, heard that, and
believed it to be the case, and we were confirmed
in that belief, by what was stated by your Lordship, and acquiesced in by the Attorney-General,
the other day.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I beg to
I
say, that I acquiesced in nothing of the kind.
was told that something passed while I was out
of Court.
Mr. BAINES :-This fell from your Lordship, that, if these parties were to be convicted,

Jrn

they were to be convicted of one and the same
offence.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-My Lord, so far
from acquiescing in that, I said, that it might be
a question for consideration hereafter, but that
we would not discuss it then,
The JUDGE :-Yes, I said so.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I thought
this was the first and proper time to call your
Lordship's attention to the question.
.Mr. BAINES :-Btt, surely, whein the Attorney-General opened his case in that way, he
ought to have stated, that we, the defendants,
ought to take notice, that he mea t to depart
from the views he took in his opening speech.
The JUDGE .--What he now says is, that it
is competent to convict some of them (to take
the case he put) as guilty of riot, and others not
guiltyriot, to be, nevertheless, guilty of an
of
assault. If, Mr. Attorney, you tell me that Lord
Denman has decided that, and that the Court of
Queen's Bench has so decided, I must of course
bbw to that decision at once.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I beg to
sthat distinctly to your Lordship, that this very
inddictfient was framed expressly upon that authority, and witha view to that particular decision.
The JUDGE :-What was the case there?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I think, my
Lord, it was an indictment for a conspiracy for
some purpose, coupled with the bringing of some
false evidence. Some of the counts charged it
simply as procuring false evidence.
Mr. WORTLEY :-So far from acquiescing,
your Lordship will"remember that I said that
that might be a question hereafter; but I would
not discuss it then.
The JUDGE:-Perfectlycertain Iamof this,-,
that, whatever I may have said respecting something that was then going on, there was nothing
of a decision; but I shall be glad to hear your
case.

Mr. WORTLEY ;-I would call your Lordship's attention to a case under the special coinmission at Liverpool, before Mr. Justice Cresswell. The names of the defendants were Cully
and others, and the indictment was very similar
to this, containing counts for conspiracy, riot
and unlawfully assembling. There was no evidence of conspiracy in that case. The facts
were these:-There had been a large meeting
at Ashton, in the morning, amounting to an
illegal assembly; they proceeded from Ashton
in a body, to a mill, where they committed
a riot. At first, Mr. Justice Cresswell, conceiving that they were two separate transactions,
refused to allow one set of defendants to be
convicted upon one count, and another set on
another count. But when we showed, by the
evidence, that we traced all the mob from one
place to the other, and that it was all one
transaction, then he allowed us to take a conviction for a riot, in one case, and for an unlawful assembly in the other. Those whom we
could not show to be present at the riot were
convicted of the unlawful assembly.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I can assure
your Lordship, that the indictment was very
anxiously considered indeed; and framed expressly with a view to this decision.
Mr. DUNDAS :-It may have been the same
kind of case as that to which Mr. Wortley
alludes.
Mr. WORTLEY :-In that case there were
three counts in the indictment, and each defendant was convicted on a separate count.
Mr. DUNDAS :-The case of the King v.
Butterworth, shows that you may convict one
man for a riot, another for a burglary, and another for something else, being part of the charge,
because that was in the same count.
The JUDGE :-That is where one is more
guilty than another. I do not see why you may
not have three indictments against three persons; one for assault, one for obtaining money
under false pretences, and one for nuisance;
you may charge them as all being guilty of the
same offences; though A. has nothing to do
with the assault, B. with the nuisance, or C.
with obtaining the money. Here the defendants
do not know to what to direct their attention :
that is the difficulty. Is it not a hardship on
the defendants that they do not know against
what they are to defend themselves ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-If there is
no connection between the offences, it is a dif.

182
Arent thing. But, my Lord, I put this case:A number 'of persons assemble outside Manchester, and there do certain things; they come
into Manchester, and coalesce with certain other
persons to do certain other things; then a portion of them go away from Manchester, and
do something else; and some of them are present from beginning to end of the transaction.
I apprehend, you may indict those who are part
and parcel of the whole, along with other persons who take a subordinate share, and by
pipper counts, so as to meet the case of those
who take a share, may include the whole upon
one indictment, and may convict some upon the
first count, others upon the second, and others
again upon the third, as in the case before Mr.
Justice Cresswell.
The JUDGE :-The case at Liverpool, before
Mr. Justice Cresswell, was all one transaction.
Mr. MURPHY:-The question for argument
resolves itself into two distinct sets of charges.
On every one of these counts all these persons are
charged with conspiring together.
The JUDGE :-No, not with conspiring together.
Mr. MURPHY :-They are charged with conspiring together in all those counts where conspiracy is mentioned. Suppose that twelve
persons merely met to conspire to abet the
tOessation of work, and that twenty others took
advantage of that cessation for the purpose of
making a change in the laws; should it be said
that those who merely met to abet the cesssation
of labour, carrying out the combination for procuring an advance of wages, under the act of
George IV., were to be held to be guilty, because
other persons conspired for a different and illegal
object ?
The JUDGE :-That is a different question;
because they would not come within the counts.
Mr. MURPHY:-Then I say that the offences here are clearly different.
The JUDGE:-The only thing that staggers
me is the case Mr. Wortley put as occuring at
Liverpool. The case you put, Mr. Attorney, as
beginning outside Manchester, is different. It
enly goes to show, that all might be included in
one indictment. I do not say that there is anything unreasonable in that; but this is not so.
This includes in the first set of counts, a conspiracy to cause riots; and, in the others, the actual
perpetration of riots; which are perfectly differeat acts.
Mr, DUNDAS ;-Yes, different acts and different punishments.
The JUDGE :-All I can do, I fear, as the
record is before me, and I don't know how to

get rid ofit otherwise,is totake the opinionof
the jury upon every count as to every defendant.
But then comes the question, as to whether any
jstgment can be come to on such a record ? Some
may be guilty on one count, and some on another;
some may be convicted on one count, and some
on another. Some may be found guilty on the last
count who are not on the first, and some on the
first who are not on the last. There is no doubt
that it is the commonest thing in the world, that
were a party is charged with a felony, he makes
his election, and I confess I don't see the difference between a felony and misdemeanor on such
a subject. The diffculty is, that the defendants
will have great difficulty in knowing which charge
is intended to hit them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, I
state very distinctly that that very difficulty was
very anxiously discussed by all those who were
consulted on the subject of the prosecution ; and
the present indictment was framed expressly with
a full sense of that. At the same time, allow me
to state this; that, if there be any mode that can
abridge that labour for your LordshipThe JUDGE:-I do not complain for a moment
of the labour; but, when that is done, I feel extremely doubtful whether I'can give any judgment upon the present record.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord,
the difficulty I have is in seeing what objection
there is to it; because, at all events, there is not
any one of these counts, upon which a large number of defendants may not be found guilty. Even
abandoning the rest of the counts, it seems to
me, that the crown can proceed upon the one at
all events.
The JUDGE:-The party is put to his election.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-That is the
practice of the Court.
. The JUDGE :-It seems to me, that the
defendant is put to unreasonable and improper
difficulty in arranging his defence. I confess
I do not see the difference in this respect between felony and misdemeanor. I haxe not
had an opportunity of considering the case,
it comes upon me so far entirely by surprise;
but, looking at the indictment, it did occur to
me that there was that difficulty in it. But,
upon the Attorney-General's telling me that
the thing was discussed, I dare say it is very
likely that I have taken a wrong view of it. At
all events, I have made up my mind that I must
proceed with it here, and take a verdict upon
each count as to each def1~ndat, if none of the
counts are abandoned.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
I will state at once what I will do. I will abandon
at once the count for a riot.

183
The JUDGE :-That implies the four lastcounts.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-YourLordship knows that there is an obvious reason.
The JUDGE:-That will absolve the defendants from any difficulty.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL--YourLordship is aware that the punishmentin cases of riot is
different, and may proceed to a length to which I
have no desire to expose some of the defendants,
against whom that charge cannot be established.
TheI JUDGE:-I think you will see, that that
oplies to all the last four counts.
The Sixth count charges the defendants with
utilawfully causing divers persons to assemble
and meet together, and by threats and violence
unlawfully to force, and endeavour to force,
divers of her Majesty's peaceable subjects to depart from their employment and work, against
the peace of the Queen, &c.-Seventh, for unlawfully inciting and stirring up, and endeavouring to
incite and stir up, great numbers of her Majesty's
liege subjects, with force of arms, unlawfully,
riotously, and tumultuously, to assemble together,
and by threats, violence, and intimidation, unlawfully to force, and endeavour to force, divers of
her Majesty's subjects to depart from their hiring
and work.--Eighth, that the defendants and
divers others did unlawfully meet and assemble
together, with clubs, sticks, and other offensive
weapons to disturb the tranquillity, peace, and
good order of this realm, and in contempt of her
Majesty the Queen, and against her peace, her
crown, and dignity.-Ninth, (the common count
for riot), that the defendants and others unknown
did unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously
assemble and continue together for a long space
of time, to witfor six hours or more, to the great
terror of her MVajesty's lieges, then and there being
ia contempt of the Queen and her laws, and against
the peace of the Queen, her crown, and dignity."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I will take
any course your Lordship thinks proper.
The JUDGE:-I confess, I think, you will do
mnuch wiser to abandon the last four counts, which
reklly relate to actual riot, of which, as against the
bulk of the defendants, there is no evidence at all.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-My Lord,
I put Mr. Scholefield forward as a prominent
instance of one of the defendants who was certainly not within that; and it is but fair to say,
that I should not purpose, or at all desire, to deal
so very differently with some, as compared with
others of the defendants, as to expose them to a
punishment so very different.
The JUDGE :-The question we may take to
be in the five first counts. In these the defend*

ants are all charged either with e6nspiring to
cause an alteration in the laws and constitution,
by making the people cease from tabour, or inciting them to do it, which will be nearly the
same thing? Then, as to the fifth count, another
question must arise about that. This count charges
the defendants for conspiring togethet with others
unknown, to excite her Majesty's lieges to disaffection and hatred of her laws; and unlawfully
to endeavour to persuade and encourage the said
liege subjects to unite, confederate, and agree to
leave their several and respective employments
and to produce a cessation of labour; with intent,
by so doing, to bring about certain great changes
in the laws of the realm. It does not charge
them with conspiring to do anything by violence,
but with an endeavour to persuade the people to
confederate together and leave their employments,
so as to produce a cessation of labour, and thereby
to bring about a change in the laws and constitution. I know there are different opinions in
very high quarters as to whether tha t constitutes
a crime or not. It then becomes':a questiqn
whether you will confine them to the first four
counts. Therefore, we may consider the riot as
entirely out of the question.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL:-Perhaps
your Lordship will allow me to look at the indictment. My recollection of the counts is nbt
sufficiently strong to enable me to makea distisdetion between the sixth and seventh, but I do not
think the sixth and seventh counts involve an actual riot.
The JUDGE :-No; they do not. You may
choose to go on with them; but it seems to me
very desirable to limit the number of counts as
much as possible; and I think you will find that,
substantially, the first four counts comprise all.
[The indictment was then handed to the Attorney-General for inspection, and at this time the
jury retired for refreshment.]
Mr. O CONNOR, -- [To the Attorney Gene.
ral]
Give up the whole charge altogether
against the defendants, and it will be doing an
act of grace of which you may never have such
another opportunity during your life,The jury having returned,The ATTORNEY GENERAL said - 'I
thought your Lordship would give me till tomorrow morning to consider this matter. I
shall only say now, that I abandon all charge Qf
riot, because I cannot make it out against all
the
defendants. I thinik this will relieve your Lordship, and dome to the siame thing.
The JUDGE -That lead us substantially to
know what you willdo; and I think, if not in
point of fornm, at least in substance, that limits

184
ittotthe offences:as charged in the'early counts. Brooke, and to state' to yu fairly',a
as
Besides, we are not going on anactual riot; the freeman ought, what are- the gotlrds on
substance of the counts is: -a conspiracy by which

afesing unlawful assemblies of seditious persons, charge.

he

says

"not

guilty"

to this

But, before I proceed to enter

and by seditious speeches and placards, &c., to into his case, allow me to remind you, as
bling about a change in the constitution.
in common conscience to the other de-

The ATTORNEY- GENERAL:-I believe fendants I ought to remind you, that I
that the offence of riot subjects the parties con- appear but for Robert Brooke alone. The

victed of it to hard labour.

I have no desire to other defendants are, some of them, re-

make any distinction between one set of persons
and another, with respect to anything of that
sort; and I beg that that may be distinctly understood.
Mr. DUNDAS, then rose to address
the jury on behalf of one of the defendants.
The JUDGE :-Who do you appear
for ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I appear for Robert
Brookes, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : I now beg leave to put in all those placards, my Lord, which were read, some
of them at one stage of the proceedings,
and some at another. I presume my
learned friends don't want to have them
read over again.
Mr. DUNDAS: There was one
read (the conference address) from Mr.
O'Connor's paper; that is the only way
it was read.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :It was proved to day that the statement
in the paper of the 20th of August, was
a correct statement. Does anybody wish
it to be read over again ?
Mr. DUNDAS :-I don't desire it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Your Lordship has Biooke's notes also.
The JUDGE :-Yes, 1 have. I have
not got the paper headed
Run for
Gold" yet.
Mr. WORTLEY:- The placard,
"Run forGold," I think your lordshiphas.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:- It is
.amongst those papers.
The JUDGE :-Was it read ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-It was
read on Saturday, my Lord.
Mr. DUNDAS:-May it please your
Lordship, Gentlemen of the Jury, the
case forthe prosecution being now closed,
the Attorney-General in his discretion
calling no more witnesses on the part of
the prosecution which he is here to con,duct, it becomes my duty to present myself now to you as counsel for Robert

presented by learned friends of mine,
whom I rejoice in having associated with
me in this Work of rivilege, defendin
those persons entrusted to our charge.
Other defendants appear here by themselves, to receive at your hands what they
claim for them; that fair and liberal construction of evidence, which I have not
the slightest doubt you will pay them all,
even the humblest, as much as if they
were represented by the highest advocates
in my own profession, whom I have the
honour of sitting by at this moment. Al.
low me to add one more fact, which, I
trust, from the beginning to the end of
this case you will bear in mind-that
each and every of those defendants, though
joined in one common charge in this indictment stands, severally, upon his own
deliverance. And therefore, your charge
is not, irii the first place against them all,
but it is in the first place with respect to
each, to see whether, by the fprce of
truth--by that necessity which ought to
weigh on just-minded men, you fiid
yourselves compelled by what has been
given in evidence to find any one of them
guilty upon this indictment. I. think it
right to say that, because my privilege to
address you first arises in point of seniority only; and not because of any eloquence I possess, It is simply on this
account, that I rise to address you for
Brooke, before any one is heard on the
part of the other defendants; or before
any of them is heard in his own defence.
Gentlemen, having made these preliminary observations, which I trust you will
'not consider ill-timed, I will proceed with
your leave, to say something on behalf of
my client. I think you, will remember
that in the calm and formal opening of
this case, which was made by the Attorney-General last Wednesday morning,
that the name of my client never transpired-that though I sat longing, and
waiting to know upon what grounds Robert Brooke was to be found guilty of this

charge-although, as it was my duty to
do, I watched the Attorney-General from
the moment he first opened his mouth till
the time he concluded his address, I never had niy attention pointed at all to my
client. I do not complain of my learned
friend for that; the multiplicity of the
defendants make it no such easy matter
to point out to the jury, the particular
evidence to be applied to each; but I
confess I found it a difficulty, and, at this
moment, I find it not only a grievance, but a considerable burden on
*nby hands, that I had not at first an opportunity of knowing what it was, that
was to be immediately pressed on my
client, and by what species of evidence it was that they for the prosecution sought conviction at your hands.
I knew by the indictment the nature of
the charge they were going to bring
against him, but when I tell you that that
indictment contains nine counts, some of
them different from others,why,gentlemen,
you know as well as I do, that if it does
not open a door to vague and undefined
accusations, it makes it fast against the
defeidant's defence. The Attorney-General, in his opening puts the issue on
this single point. And it is in your recollection--ydu are my witnesses that
this is the single charge which he makes
against all those defendants, including
my client. He charges the defendants,
that by large assemblages they have endeavoured, by force, threats and intimidatioi, to breed such alarm in the country as to produce a change in some of
the great features of the Constitution.
That is the general charge which the
Attorney-General has heaped upon all
ibe defendants; and, gentlemen, on my
cliet-that poor lame man who lives at
Todmorden, who is thus, with all the
strength of the crown to be borne down
on this single issue. I say for him, that
he has done no such thing; but that his
intention, and his act, (if you take the
whole evidence which touches him at all)
were to induce the people out on strike
to adopt .he principles of the People's
Charter. And I say, in the presence of
the Court, that that is quite a different
thing from saying, that by threats and
intimidation he intended to breed such
alarm in the country, as to produce a
change in some of the fundamental points

of the Constitution. I declare it for him,
that his object was to induce the people
who were out on strike, by reasonable
means-by such means as I say, when
you come to apply your minds to the
evidence, you will see these means were
to induce them to adopt the six points of
the Charter. That is quite a distinct
thing. It is qpite consistent with the
law to endeavour to induce persons out
on the strike, to adopt the Charter. Gentlemen, what was the strike ? -I first ask
what was the strike, and then we will
see what was the Charter; and I will say
that if the men were out on strike, that
I;if I were a Chartist, might take advantage to induce them to accomplish
that, by legal enactment, which they think
will cure the mischiefs which brought
that strike about. I know that is a bold
proposition, but it is one which in a free
country a freeman has a right to make,
and my client is determined to abide by
it. He is determined to show that he
had no intention by f6rce, threats, or intimidation, to do anything to induce those
people who are out on a strike, to come
into the principles of the People's Charter. If he had sought by bayonet; by
pistol, and violence of that kind, to bring
about the Charter, no doubt it would
have been illegal; but they would find
that he had done no such thing. You
will find, in respect to my client, that he
had no intention to do so. He did by
moral, not physical force, endeavour to
bring about the enactment of the
six points of the Charter. Now, gentlemen, I ask you what was the strike ?.
you remember, all of you who live
in this part of the country, the beginning, and the origin, very likely, of
the differences between the working men
and their masters. I am not here, curiously, to dive into the particular causes,
which, in this part of the country, or in
any other, brought about the disagreements between the working men and
their masters; enough for me that the
working men were, in many parts of the
country, extremely dissatisfied with their
wages; that they were, in different parts
of the country, under an expectation,
(whether well or ill founded it is not for
me to say,) that their wages were still to
be more reduced ;-and that the working
men of the country had, at that time, as-

sembled together (as they were entitled
to do under the law;made on that behalf)
to consider for themselves that question,
which has, again and again, met our ears
in the course of this inquiry-whether
for a "fair day's work they could not
have a fair day's wages." I say that by
law they had a perfect right to it. Every
working man in England, has a right to
sell his labour to the best advantage. As
the masters are protected, so are the men.
The masters may meet together and
combine to see what wages they may
give, and so may the men in order to determine what wages they will accept from
the masters.
My learned friend has
thought that it was no afiair of his to
mention that, but the jury are cognizant
of this, that the law is, that the working
men may meet together without fear of
consequences to consider what is best for
them on the §ubject of wages. I refer
to the 6th of Geo. IV. cap. 129, made
n July 1825, which I say bears me out
fully in that particular. 'lIrefer especially
to the 4th section of that act which provides that the act "shall not extend to
subj t any persons to punishment who
shall meet together for: the sole purpose
of consulting upon, and determining the
rate of wages at prices which the persons
present at such meeting, or any of them,
shall require or demand for his or her
work." There is a protection there for
every person, the working man whoever
he be, whether wisely or unwisely, whether reasonably or unreasonably dissatised, has a full right, under thelanction
of this law, to meet his bfellow-workmen,
and to consider in what manner they
might bring about a better rate of wages.
And you will find that at all those meetings which were held in different parts of
the-countryr, Ashton, Stalybridge ' Royton, Baccup, and other places whih were
alhlded to befre-what is called the
invasion of Manchester, (and, I am
not going to defend any violence or intemperance of conduct that may have
been used at those meetings.) -- You
will'find that the working men, whether
they turned out at their own accord,
or joined others who forced them out,
had, invariably held thqse meetings for
the purpose of discussing the question of
wages,
houghvery oftn Charsts were

put, wher it was a wage or a Chartist
meeting. But does any one dout, that
the origiial object of' those meetings,
was to effect a better remuneration for
labour ? Does any doubt, that the persons then assembled, might not consider
whether they could be better paid for
their labour, or that they thought, whether reasonably or no, I shall not stop to
enquire, that they would not have better
pay for their work,-that the working
man's wages would always' hav a tendency to depression until that was granted,
namely, the Charter, whereby the working men would, as they thought, be ultimately a gainer. I anino Chartist, but I
differ immensely from many persons who
think the Charter contains in it nothing
of truth. I have strong opinion in politics, but for the life of me, I never could
look down on a man as a bad man or a
bad subject, because he differed with me in
politics. I have lived to see some of those
opinions which, when young, and I am
now old, were reprobated and denounced
as heretical and dangerous, and adopted
as government measures, and that by the
very people, whose language was ever
readily employed in besmearin those,
who dared to indulge them, wit every
expression of contempt and abomination,
as bad subjects, and as open-enemies to
the constitution. There is one of the
points of the Charter to which I shall
call your attention; it is the vote by ballot. Who does not remember, that
twenty years ago; any person advocatin
the ballot, would have been looked upon
almost as a wild man, arid put down by
the common consent of all parties, as a
madman; whereas now, it is impossible
to go into any company or society, where
you do not find people saying, either
that they are for the ballot, or that it is a
matter, which, when more duly considered, they may fall into. You can go
no where in which this much maligned
mode bf voting does not find defenders,
I know that many honest and well meaning men are opposed to the ballot, just
as very honest men have with tood for a
time, and afterwards yielded a reluctant
assent, to a great deal of the conistitution
as it now is. But, for all that, if there
he truth in a political principle, depend
upon it, sooner or later, it will become a

present; an. the question was frequently part of the constitution, in spite of all

187
opposition that might be raised against
it. I have thrown out these observations, because it seemed to have been
taken for granted, during the greater part
of my learned friend's address, that, to
be a Chartist, is to be a dangerous man,that a man who sought any change at
all, wished to upset the constitution.
Just as if a man could not put forth his
views, and promote them by moral
means--by argument, and by taking
advantage of the generally expressed
opinion of the conatry, without having
adesire to overturn the constitution of
the country. My learned friend seems
to have thought, that a man could not
be a Chartist, or such a thing as a Chartist, without being dangerous to the state,
and without endeavouring to make a fundamental inroad on the principles of the
constitution. Now, gentlemen, this strike,
asI said, was upon wages; my client was a
Chartist.
He thought, among other
things, that it was not necessary that members of parliament should, have any property qualification when they sat there.
I am sure I should be a very unworthy
Scotchman if I were to say, that I did not
think that a very bad law which makes a
•property qualification necessary. Thereare
fifty-six members that comefrom Scotland,
andnotone of them has any qualification at
al- (Laughter)- and also the members of
our Universities. So you see, there are in
this Charter some things not so absolutely
reprehensible but that honest men may be
persuadedof theirtruth, andmaythinkthat,
if carried into effect, the working men may
'be better off than they are atpresent. Now,
then, there being a strike, the men who
Wook part in it, thought they never would
be better off till they got the Charter. I
say a Chartist has a ight to stand by
and say to the working people, or to any
people who are discontented with their
wages, if lawfully discontented,-" I apcrave of your staying out of your work
till such time as the Charter, by becoming the law of the land, makes you better
in respect of your wages." Just cast
your eye back for a rmoment,' to what was
the condition of the country from the end
of July up to the 15th or 16th of August.
In different parts of the country there
were thousands of persons out of work.
I think you have it in evidence, that
some of those persons could not get into

work again; that whether it be true or
false of many, it certainly was true of one
or two mill-owners, that they shut their
doors for a month, and would not take
the work people in again though they
applied for work. That was the account
of one witness called by the prosecution,
You will find, gentlemen, no great disapproval on the part of the shopkeepers,
of those parties out on strike; but yoe
will find that those persons out on strike
were taught to believe that it would be a
good thing not only for the working
classes, but even for the shopkeepers
themselves, if the Charter could be con
stitutionally carried, and, therefore, those
persons who were Chartists-I am not
defending their intemperance, but leading
your minds to a point where my client is
brought into the field - many of the
Chartists who attended those meetings
always ended their speeches with," a fair
day's wages for a fair day's work," and,
"' we will keep out until the Charter becomes the law of the land." I maintain,
that that was perfectly lawful for them.
The strike.having continued, and this
view of Chartism having been, no doubt,
strongly entertained by the working peopie; what happened, it is a most astonishing thing, that so many people in so
many different parts of the country, with
no particular leader, but under some
benign influence,-under the influence
of what may be called the love of "peace,
law, and order," although they broke the
peace here and did not keep order there,
yet, generally, under some such influence, though out of work for many and
many a day, they congregated in great
numbers without doing any great vioIt is
lence to person or property.
certainly a very remarkable circumstance.
My learned friend, the Attorney-General, gAve his full admiration to many of
the parties so engaged, and I believe that
it could not have happened in any other
country; that thousands of persons should
be in the greatest necessity, and yet do
no act of violence to life, and that acts of
violence to property, for their own private gain, were almost nothing at all.
It is true that some provisions were taken,
and some pounds of money denianded;
but there is no proof of any man having
been actuated by motives purely selfish.
Itisa most s. rprising anxd astanishing thO

188
thing, and one cannot help wondering
at the conduct of those men, who, under
no other guidance than that of " peace,
law, and order"-words which the Attorney-General says, were only put into
their mouth-that this large body of
men should be so long on the face of the
country, without doing any damage at
all, either to life, or limb; and scarcely
any to the property of any individual.
However, they got to Manchester, and I
will take them from the time, when
Manchester is first spoken of, (I think
the 9th of August,) you will find that
there was a great meeting at Ashton, from
which the people proceeded to Manchester. On the 16th or 17th of that month
there was to be a meeting of delegates in
Manchester. But what was the evidence
of that meeting at Ashton going to Manchester ? You have the evidence of
Turner, that Pilling, oie of the defendants, said he wished to go to Manchester with the men, to meet the masters,
as the masters would not meet them; to
obtain a fair day's wages for a fair day's
work, and not resume labour -till they
got the wages of 1840. Now, these are
parties that advanced on Manchester,
that is the first time we hear of any party
going into it, At this time, also, some
mills were stopped, but no damage was
done to life, limb, or property, by that
body of people which advanced on Manchester. Before this time, there can be
no doubt that the Chartists intended to
have a great meeting in Manchester, on
the 16th or 17th of August, on several
grounds. First, there had been some falling out in the body, and they thought it
desirable to have a meeting of delegates,
so that they should, in some way or other,
settle these things among themselves; to
take their organization (for they had a
right to be organized, if they kept the
peace) into consideration, in order to see
whether it required alteration. Secondly,
those persons were to meet as delegates,
were to celebrate the 16th of August, the
day when Mr. Hunt's monument was to
be fairly opened to the public. My client
Brooke, who lives, as you have heard, at
Todmorden, he was appointed a delegate
at Manchester. Is there any thing unlawful in being a delegate ? I apprehend there is nothing unlawful in being
a delegate from any particular party of

Chartists, to meet other Chartists, to discuss those subjects to which I have referred. The first time we hear of himthe first notice we have of Robert Brooke,
at all, in this case is, the evidence you
have of his being at a conference meeting on the 17th of August, in Mr.
Scholefield's chapel, in Manchester.
Now, gentlemen, there cannot be a
doubt, if you take the evidence of Cartledge and Griffin, both of whom have
been put forward, on the other side, as
parties who must know the truth of the
matter-there cannot be the least doubt
but that assemblage, at Manchester, was
wholly irrespective of, and unconnected
with, the turn out in different parts of the
country. For weeks and weeks before
the strike took place, it had been arranged
that they should hold that meeting in
Manchester. In the first place, I will
refer to Cartledge's evidence. He says,
" I was a delegate; I did not intend to
do any thing illegal. There was a conference to be held between the delegates
and the Executive committee. It was
to meet about Hunt's monument."
You have afterwards, gentlemen, evidence from Griffin to the same effect--that the meeting was projected several
weeks before the strike, and therefore the
delegates might be reasonably there, according to the projected plan of meeting,
together for the purpose of looking into
the concerns of their body, to see if there
was anything unlawful in it, to settle the
differences existing between their leaders,.
about opinions, and, at the same time, to
have a meeting in reference to the celebration of the opening of Hunt's monument. But was Mr. Hunt's monument
a reasonable thing that the delegates
should meet at Manchester, on the 16th
of August, or was it only an excuse for
their being there ? Why you have it in
evidence from Mr. Mullen, a policeman,
in Manchester, that for years and years
before, there had been always meetings
on that day; that the year before last,
he witnessed an assemblage of 2,000
persons in honour of the memory of Mr.
Hunt; and that, on the last 16th of
August, a similar manifestation was intended. That is Mr. Mullen's testimony;
he said notices were put up that there was
to be this meeting. I will remind you
of one of these notices which were read,

189
publishing to all the world, that Hunt's
monument was to be opened the 16th of
August. The JUDGE : -Were these notices
put in ?
Mr. BAINES: - I shall put these
placards in. I shall take care that your
Lordship is furnished with them.
Mr. DUNDAS:-I shall now read a
placard which will certify beyond all
manner of doubt, that the delegates did
not go there for the purpose of taking
advantage of any strike, or do anything
that was illegal; but they went there for
the purpose, as proved by Cartledge and
Griffin, for their own particular interests;
and, in the next place, for the purpose of
celebrating the monument of Hunt's anniversary. Here is the placard that was
put out, what the authorities' read, what
every one who had eyes in his head could
have seen, and, which was seen by
M'Mullen and Beswick. This is supposed
to have been published on the 1st of
August.
"HUNT'S MONUMENT.
"Men of Manchester, Salford, and the surrounding towns and villages, be at your posts!In conformity with the announcement of the
committee in the placards previously issued, we
hereby give instructions to be observed on the
16th of August, 1842, when
"A GRAND PROCESSION
" Will take place to celebrate the completioft of
the monument, in memory of the late
"HENRY HUNT, ESQ.
"Those trades who resolve to join in the Procession, are requested to meet the members of
the National Charter Association, and other
friends of Henry Hunt, in Stephenson's-square,
precisely at ten o'clock in the forenoon, where
the procession will be formed, and thence march
in due order, headed and conducted by two
Marshals, through the following streets :
namely, Lever-street, Piccadilly, London.road,
to Ardwick-green, there to meet the patriot
"O'CONNOR.
"After which to move down Rusholme-road,
Oxford-road, Peter-street, passing which the
bands are instructed to play ' The Dead March.'
It will next move along Deansgate, St. Ann'ssquare, Market-street, Oldham-street, Oldhamroad, Butler-street,, to the Rev. J. Scholefield's

burial-ground, where Feargus O'Connor, Esq.,

and the delegates from various parts of the
country will address the people."
" GABRIEL HARGREAVES,
" THOMAS RAILTON,

Marshals."

And then there is a postscript, which is

very much to be remarked for the propriety of its langnage.
" The committee most urgently and respect
fully beg that all who join the procession will
observe the same sobriety and decorum for which
our former gatherings have been so admirably
distinguished, and thus give another indicatibn
of our regard for PEACE, LAW, and ORDER."

Now, on the 1st of August, was there any

indication of this outbreak ?-Was there
any indication that the delegates would
take advantage of the strike, to upset the
government and the constitution ? It
was stated, that on the 17th of August,
Feargus O'Corinor, and the delegates of
the Chartists, were to meet for that pur-

pose, It appears there was to be a ball
in Carpenters' Hall, and the announcement of it was placarded over Manches-

ter, and

then arose the strike.

workmen

of the

neighbouring

advanced on Manchester,

The
towns

and those

difficulties and breaches of the public
peace, of which you have heard, ensued.

And what did these men and Chartists
do ? Why, they desired nothing like
overturning the constitution, or breaking
the peace, or upsetting the civil govern-

ment, and, thereby introducing that law
of disorder and destruction, which the
learned counsel on the other side would
have you believe. They intended to do
nothing more than that which I say they
had a right to do, but which right they
waived, rather than endanger the public
peace; for, to their honour, be it said,
they issued placards, announcing their
intention to postpone the opening of
Hunt's monument, least any breach of
the peace should occur. 1 am obliged
thus to introduce this matter, in order to
show why my client was at the conference.
" Procession and Meetihfg prohibited by the
Authorities.-The committee for the erection of
Hunt's Monument respectfully inform the public, that, in consequence of the very unexpected
excitement of the town of Manchester and its vicinity, occasioned by a turn-out for an advance
of wages, they have decided that the procession

190
and meeting in Mr. Scholefield's premises, as an- as to whether that resolution to which I
nounced in former bills for the 16th of August, 'am about to draw your attention, should
1842, will not take place, lest it should give an
opportunity to increase that excitement, the
odium and consequences of which have been attempted to be fixed on the Chartist body.
" The Tea-party and ball, as by former bills,
will take place in the evening, at Carpenters'
Hall.
" N.B. A number of very neat china models
of the monument have arrived, and will be exposed for sale on that day, at from Is. 4d. to
Is. 6d. each; the profits of which are for the

funds of the monumentde

fundsSCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
monument.FILDChairman."
" of the
J.

That was an announcement which the
authorities saw with their eyes. It was
issued by the Chartist body, in order that
peace might be kept, and order promoted
in that part of her Majesty's dominions.
Well then, the strike continued ; the men
had a right to talk about wages; many
of them, no doubt, behaved tumultuously.
The meeting of delegates took place, and
I see no reason why they should not
meet. Brooke was appoint'ed a delegate
from Todmorden, and he went, as the
evidence of Cartledge and Griffin tells us,
to the conference of Scholefield's chapel.
issued
He address; itof the executive, hethe adno was none is quite clear that
no address; it is quite clear that the address issued by the executive committee,
was in no way brought home to him. He
might be, for anything we know to the
contrary, at Todmorden when that address was issued. We have nothing to
show that it ever was in his hands. He had
nothing to do with the concocting, writing,
or amending of it. It was on the 16th
of August he came to Manchester. The
first time we hear of him at the conference
is on the 17th of August. Well, on the
17th of August what do we find him
doing ? not one single word is proved to
have fallen from his lips; neither Cartledge nor Griffin speak one single syllable of evidence, which affects this man,
except, that he was in the conference. At
that conference the delegates came to a
resolution which I shall read with confidence, as being quite consistent with the
case which I set up for nmy client; that
he had no hand in that strike, but that
he did approve of the people making use
of that strike for their own benefit; it appears there was a difference of opinion,

be adopted or not.
Twenty-seven or
twenty-eight voted for the resolutionseven or eight voted in the minority. We
do not know who they were, but we know
that certain persons to the number of
seven or eight, thought it right to vote
against the resolution. They had their
own reasons for doing so; but the majority carried it, and the resolution was
every
co
to. And what was to word of ition
for if I understand the meaning of inguage, and taking it as proved that the
delegates were there for the purpose of
looking after the affairs of the Chartist
body, I say you cannot extract from this
resolution, any thing prejudicial to my
client. The following is the resolution:
"That whilst the.Chartist body did not originate the present cessation from labour"
I say they did not originate it, it was
originated by the working men in all
parts of the country. The working men
had a right to cease from labour,.and they
had a perfect right to stay out, till they
got a proper remuneration for their
labour:"This conference of delegates, from various
parts of England, express their deep sympathy
with their constituents, the working men now
on strike, and that we strongly approve the extension and continuance of their present struggle
till the People's Charter becomes a legislative
enactment, and decide, forthwith, to issue an
address to. that effect, and we pledge ourselves,
on our return to our localities, to give a proper
direction to the people's efforts."
Had the conference of delegates no right
to express their sympathy with their constituents, the working people. I say they
have, both as men, and, according to
law, as subjects. 'I know of no law which
can prevent these men from expressing
their deep sympathy with, and commisseration for, the turn-outs, on account of
the wrongs, if they sufferel any, and the
inconveniences, if any,to which they were
exposed. And they did express " their
deep sympathy with their constituents,
the working men now on strike."-And
had they no right to "approve the extension and continuance of their present
struggle ?"---Yes, I say I have a right as
an independent man in this country to

stand by any party out on strike, and
approve of their conduct in holding out,
till they considered themselves redressed.
I have a right to do o, provided I do
not by force, or intimidation, or unlawful
means do that which is charged in the
indictment against

my client.-

" We

strongly approve of the extension and
continuance of their present struggle, till
the People's Charter becomes a legislative
enactment ;"-till such time as the wrongs
of those people are remedied by the parliament - by a legislative enactment.
That is the meaning of the resolution.
"We delegates stand by and see you
workmen out on strike, and we approve
of your standing out till your grievances
are removed, and the evils under which
you suffer are remedied, and they won't
be remedied till the Charter is obtained."
-That may be wrong. I don't say the
Chartists are right. I have my own
opinions, whether universal suffrage be a
good thing, or whether any general extension of the franchise, could possibly
be a remedial measure for the working
classes. That is another question. We
live in a free country, and the working
men have a right to consider these points
in politics for themselves, and if they do
not break the law, which, in this instance,
I submit to you, under his Lordship's
direction, they have not done, they
have a right to meet and consider the
question of wages, or the principles of the
Charter, and to express their opinions
upon them, although, in doing so, they
may be laughed at by some, and looked
down upon, attacked and denounced, by
other portions of the community. This
resolution was come to by the delegates;
and will any one say that Brooke, of
Todmorden, who has never been heard
of, in connection with this outbreak, in
other parts of the country; who has never
been spoken to till the 17th of August,
when he was concurring in that resolution,-will any one say he committed a
crime ?-He was not the author of that
address.
I think no one says it was
mentioned before the meeting of delegates. But it was quite clear that he
was at the conference, as a representative
from a different part of the country. All
he had to do was, to approve of, or
dissent from the resolution.
I submit to you there is no crime in that.

He had a perfect right to be there.
And though you or I may think his
opinions extremely bad ones, yet, the
law has not set any seal on him, that he
should not hold those opinions. I think
the Chartist opinions, as I said before,
are, some of them, perfectly wild, bad,
and dangerous. But then the law does
not say that men are not to hold and
express them. They are only to take
care that they do so lawfully; if my client
voted with the minority on that resolution,
he was doing what was perfectly legal.
He also had a right to vote in the majority; the resolution itself being legal, and
expressed in a perfectly legal manner.
Now, what is the next thing you hear of
Brooke, of Todmorden; you hear of him
next day down at Todmorden. You hear
of him at a meeting there, where he is
spoken to by one witness. At a meeting
where there was a good deal of disturbance-a good deal of noise; where, no
doubt, considerable excitement prevailed;
as always will be the case in England,
particularly where there is no person to
lead-no person to keep order, andwhere
every person is trying to get his word in.
You hear of him no where after this,
until the time he is taken in September.
Now attend to what you hear of him in
Todmorden, on the 18th of August.
William Heap says, he was at Bassinstone, where there was a meeting and
that Brooke was there; and that Brooke
said, he had been at a delegate meeting;
and there came three lettefs from a man
whose name he would not tell. He mentioned a great number of persons that
were to back him. He said, they were
gone to Leeds, and had driven the barracks, and were masters of the town at
that minute. If he said that, it was a
foolish thing; but was it illegal to say
that he had heard so ? But, gentlemen,
do you believe that all he said at that time
was told to you ? Why, gentlemen, there
is nothing so difficult, or so dangerous,
as to rely on the evidence of a man,
who, undertaking to report what he hears,
tells you only a portion of it. I think
we heard one man saying he could not
tell, whether the word was a " bloody
resolution," or a " bloody revolution," or
When you
a " bloodless revolution."
come to measure a man's guilt by wha'
he says, and that all you have of his lan.

192
guage is what a person going in the
midst of a crowd can carry away with
hin, you have a very delicate task to
perform indeed. 'It is very difficult for
the jury to rely on the report of a man
who has not brought you the whole of
the argument, or who makes it more or
less than the exact truith. There was another example of this in the course of the
case. Another witness said he was not
sure whether it was " Hoole"-the name
of a magistrate in Salford-and " Dick ;"
or " fool " and "Dick," meaning Mr.
Cobden. What a difference this makes!
Why it gives a different character to the
whole thing. Now, if this person was
the only witness to the whole transaction,
what reliance could be placed on his accuracy ? But had the witness in this case
with him some other persons in order to
corroborate his testimony? It stands on the
uncorroborated testimony of the man whose
report of what occurred at this meeting
you have heard. It is for you to say,
whether he is not mistaken. On the 5th
of September, Brooke (who was sitting at
home at the time, where he was always
ready to be found if any one came after
him,) is apprehended by a constable.
Greatstresshasbeen laid upon whatBrooke
then said: " If I had known you were
coming I would not have had any books
or papers to be seen." Why, scarcely any
person connected with politics would like
a domiciliary visit paid him by a friendly
policeman-his next neighbour, perhaps,
-no one would like such a visitor to
come into his house and take all his pa.
pers. It was not only those miserable
scratches of paper that were laid before
you already that were taken, but a whole
bundle of papers. It was natural, then,
for this man to say, "If I had known
that you were coming I should not have
had either books or papers in the house."
But what were those papers ? Why, they
gave us a diary of all that occurred at the
conference as affecting him and his constituents. Again and again, as the evidence shows, " no violence," " no physical force " had been inculcated by him;
what passed
and the constable who told uts
at Bassinstone, stated that Brooke, at the
termination of his discourse, many a time
advised the people to behave peaceably.
Now, that is the case against him. He
is never mentioned at all except when

Cartledge and Griffin speak of him. And
when the constable's brother (Heap)
speaks of the meeting at Bassinstone,
I want to know if any fair person, with a
candid mind, will say, "There is a person
conspiring with, and aiding and abetting.
others who are assembled in large and
tumultuous bodies to effect a change in.
the constitution, by urging the six points
of the Charter." Gentlemen, Ihope better things for Brooke. But my learned
friends, feeling that the case was weak as
against my client-knowing that he had
not been seen in any part of the country
doing any word or act, what did they do ?
They put in the Executive Address in
order to lead you to believe, that, if
found at Todmorden, it must have been
brought there byBrooke, the schoolmaster.
But the witness says the Executive Address was posted up on the 17th of
August, at which time, it is in evidence,
that Brooke was in Manchester. He had
no more to do with the introduction of
that address into Todmorden, than the
constable himself. It was posted up
there by some other person, and is
Brooke to be answerable for other persons
acts ? A man has enough to do now a
days, to look after himself, and I trust
you will not, by such accumulative
evidence as you have heard, press down
a man against whom nothing has been
proved beyond his attending a conference
on the 17th, and his attending a meeting
at Bassinstone. But I think it is right to
have a loqk at this Executive Address, and
see whether it will bear this terrible interpretation which my learned friend the
Attorney-Generalhasputuponit. When
you come to look upon it, you may see it
is a foolish proclamation, but we live in
the days of foolish proclamations-it
may be a silly thing, but if you believe
.that the intention of the person who wrote
it was a good intention-if you believe
that my client was at other times a peaceable person, then I say that, as it respects
him, you are bound to give it the most
liberal construction you possibly can.
But, let us see it, gentlemen; I submit to
you, that it is, in fact, an argument for
better wages, until such timne as the
Charter was lawfully carried. And if
that is the fair construction to put upon
it, although there may be a hard word
here, and a nonsensical word there, you

193
are not to consider it seditious. Any
man reading it with the common eyes
%which
nature has given him will see that
it is merely a proclamation of strong
views about a strike for wages at the time
it was published. The Attorney-General,
you will remember, read a great portion
of it in his address, and I think it proper
to introduce it to your notice on this side
before I sit down.
"Brother Chartists,-The great politicaltruths
which have been agitated during the last half
century, have at length aroused the degraded
and insulted white slaves of England to a sense
of their duty to'themselves, their children, and
their country."
White slaves ! I confess, I think there are
many oftheworking classes in England very
much in the conditipn of white slavery.
I think there are a great number of persons indeed, who may be well called
"white slaves ;" whose wages are wretched,
whose condition is miserable, who, by
reason.of the meanness of their condition, were destitute of that, which constituted the best solace of Englishmen-that which might be said, even to make
life itself desirable-domestic comfort;
who are poor, ill-clad, and have little or
no education. I do not put the blame
on any one. Perhaps we ought all of us
to take a little of the blame on ourselves,
but, however that may be, the fact is unquestionable, that a large portion of the
.working classes are steeped in the deepest
poverty, and their education is at the
very lowest condition-they are, at best,
" white slaves."
I should not have
called your attention to that, if the Attorney-General had not appeared to have
expressed so much astonishment at the
term, " white slaves," as an expression
of almost ferocity. The address goes
on :-" Tens of thousands have ,flung
down their implements of labour." They
have :-" Your task-masters tremble at
your energy, and expecting masses
eagerly watch this, the great crisis of our
cause."
By task-masters are meant,
those masters by whose reduction of
wages, the turn-out was caused;-" Labour must no longer be the common
prey of masters and rulers." That is the
language of proclamations, they are always grandiloquent, in a style half-Ossian,-half-Buonaparte-a sort of flourish

with which high-sounding proclamations
are sometimes heralded in. "Incommon
sense, we make out the meaning of these
words to be this :-For the last half century a struggle for wages has been going
on, but the working men have effected
little by their exertions., But now the
question appears to have taken hold of
the public mind, and we are in a position to achieve the object we have in
view, if we only make a proper use of
this favourable opportunity. That is a
fair construction to put on these words,
and I leave it to yourselves whether it is
a natural construction.
"Labour must no longer be the common prey
of masters and rulers. Intelligence has beamed
upon the mind of the bondsman, and he has
been convinced that all wealth, comfort, and
produce, every thing valuable, useful, and elegant, have sprung from the palm of his hand."I beg leave to say that it is true. It is
from the palm of the working man's
hand and the sweat of his brow-it is
from the industry of our population, that
this great nation has grown up to what it
is-a nation of great power-of independent men of large property, and all this
results from the industry of the common
SHe feels that his cottage is empty, his back
thinly clad, his children breadless, himself hopeless, his mind harassed, and his body punished,
that undue riches, luxury, and gorgeous plenty
might be heaped in the palaces of the task-masters, and flooded in the granaries of the oppressor."
Large, grand, eloquent words thesestrongly putting a difference between the
poor and the rich, but the mineaning when
fairly taken is-" You have not enough of
wages-you have a right to have moreyou have a right to have your case well
considered by the parliament, and you
never will have it well considered by parliament till the Charter be the law of the
land." You may not be that way of
thinking, but they are, and if they speak
their opinions like men, they may be out
argued or laughed at, if you please, but
they should not be prosecuted for holding those sentiments.
"Nature, God, and reason have condemned
this inequality, and in the thunder of a people's
voice it must perish for ever."

it4t
sion of it, or who held opinions, however
That is Ossian again.
erroneous, on this point.
" He know that labour, the real property of
"He knows that the Charter would remove,
society, the sole origin of accumulated property,
the first cause of all national wealth, and the by universal will, expressed in universal suffrage,

only supporter, defender, and contributor to the the heavy load of taxes which now crush the
greatness of our country, is not possessed of the existence of the labourer and cripple the efforts
same legal protection which is given to those of commerce."

Some of us may differ much with the
lifeless effects, the houses, ships, and machinery,
author of the address, as to the mode in
which labour have alone created."
which commerce is to be relieved, but
Gentlemen, I can understand a work- every person may have his own view in
ing man having that view-I can under- that matter without being guilty of crime.
stand that the working man, who gets up One hears the strongest opinions on that
early, goes to bed late, and eats the bread
some parties say, that a repeal of
of carefulness, who is thinly clad, and point;
would introduce peace and
home, of all those things the corn-laws
destitute of
plenty in a moment, while others lift up
which form the comforts of domestic life.
-I can easily imagine that man believ- their eyes and laugh at them for avowing
right to
ing that labour, which forms his only the opinion; but a man, has a be worth
his opinions, and it would not
property, is not enough respected and
while living in England one hour longer
protected by the law.-I can easily unif ever the law allowed one man to smite
derstand him looking on the great inter- another for his opinions. God forbid,
ests of the merchant-looking at his pro- that we should be living in England unperty in ships, in houses, and machinery.
der such a state of things. I think that,
-1 can easily imagine him saying, these if any man fairly avows his opinions,
things are protected by the law, more than however erroneous they may be, he is
the sweat of my brow is protected ; he entitled to respect.
may be wrong, but if it be his true sen" That it would give cheap government as
timent,-if he believes in his consience
I say, well as cheap food, high wages as well as low
that, is wages are not protected,
the hearthstone, plenty
that if he sets to his seal as a truth, that taxes, bring happiness to
wrongs that ought to be redressed, to the table, protection to the old, education to
he has
and rights which ought to be preserved the young, permanent prosperity to the country,
to him by the government, he ought not long-continued protective political power to lato be punished for holding that opinion. bour, and peace-blessed peace, to exhausted
-" He knows that if labour"-(This is humanity and approving nations."
the proclamation still) "has no protection,
Now, my learned friend, the Attorneywages.cannot be upheld nor in the slightest General, during the course of his address
of
degree regulated, until every workman
toyou, had two or three times on his lips
twefity-one years of ageand of sane mind, the expression, that you were not to trust
is on the same political level as the em- to those words, "peace, law and order,"
comes on universal suffrage. although used by the parties engaged in
ployer." Theon
Here is an argument by persons who those proceedings. Gentlemen, I had in
think universa suffiage is a cure for all my view what passed during the riots,
disorders. I do not think so. But I and I defy any man to tell me what it
think a very honest man may think so. was that protected the country from vioThese are matters about which honest lence except it was that love of" peace,
men may differ widely. I have lived to lao and order," which tseemed to have
see an extension of the franchise, whicih supervened all other sentiments whatever
people twenty years ago would have died in the minds of the working classes, and
to think it would go so far. And in all kept them from doing things which they
parts of England, whether, or in your awn would be very sorry to have done
county before me, I find that the fran"Therefore it is that we have solemnly sworn,
chise has extended very much within the and one and all declared, that the golden opporlast few years. And I think it would be
grasp shall not pass away
too ramuch for.any one to say, that he is a tunity now within our
bad subject who sought a further exten- fruitless, that the cheance of centuries afforded

195
to us by a wise and all-seeing God shall not be

Englishmen ? the blood of your brothers red.

lost; but that we now do ufiversally resolve dens the streets of Preston and Blackburn."

never to resume labour until labour's grievances
are destroyed, and protection secured for ourselves, our suffering wives, and helpless children,
by the enactment of the People's Charter."

A very great misfortune, indeed, that in
order to maintain the peace those persons were put to death at Preston. This
passage has been commented upon, with
much severity, by the Attorney-General.
No man can regret more than I do the
unfortunate events that have happened at
Preston, and which have led to a loss
of human life; but is it not a most extraordinary fact, and we hare it told us
by the officer who witnessed that lament-

That is to say-" You have struck for
wages, and we think this a great opportunity to carry the Charter. The strike
is almost universal. We say there
never has been such an opportunity in
the world before. It ought ot to be ost;
now you have, by reason of the inability of
any thing to stop it, an opportunity tocarry not exceeding eighty
persons,and a few
the six points of the Charter, which will soldiers,
had been able to drive back a
cure the grievances of which you have so body of men, composed
of some thoulong complained. The complaint is long. sands ? This
shows that it was the de"Intelligence has reached us of the wide- sire of the people not to try to put the
spreading of the strike, and now, within fifty authorities to extremities.
You never
miles of Manchester, every engine is at rest, and find, in this strike, that an arms were
all is still, save the millers' useful wheels and the worn by 'a single man things called
friendly sickle in the fields."
ludgeons and sticks were used, but
That is very poetical, and very near arms, whereby civil commotion, or a
what was the case, but there isno wicked- revolution, is brought about, were never
nessin it. These parties did not patthe en- employed. For instance, we have heard
gines at rest. Brooke of Todmorden did nothing of the employment of guns, pisnotputthem atrest. Buttheengineswere at tols, or sabres, which would undoubtedly
rest,there was nothing at all illegal in say- have been used, had the people intended
ing that within fifty miles of Manchester to carry their object by physical force.
onill see, fiom what passed at Presevery engine was at rest. They wereatrest. YOU
But who put them in that position, not ton, that the people were not at all dishe meeting of delegates-not the. Execu- posed to, go to extremities with the
tive Committee-not my client. It was authorities. Initead of offering any resistance to the authorities, or seeking to
the result of a proceeding which I do not
appear here to defend, but which has no place themselves in collision with th
soldiers, by people peaceably have been
connection whatever with my client spilled, the which blood mightretired,,a
Brooke: -The passage which I have read
simply means;-The engines are at rest, fact which, I think, affords the strongest
and you, the people, now on strike, have possible evidence that they had no intenan opportunity of putting those things to tion of employing physical' force forthe
rights. The strike is so universal, that attainment of their object"And the murderers thirst for more."
parliament will grant the Charter.
Gentlemen, that may be a wrong view, I don't say that that is a very proper
but if you judge a man by his honesty, word, but it is an allusion to friends of
and not (by reversing the order-ofthiuags) their own, who were put to death at
by the consequence which may result Preston, and therefore should be taken
from his opinions, you will not blame without serious observation; and when
those who recorded that sentment. I we take into consideration the circumasms not going to defend every word in stances under which the address was
this proclamation as reasonable; far fromt written, and the station in life of the
it; but, take it all together, and if yout ,parties,, it may be looked' upon with some
put that construction on it, which I think degiee of excuse.
yo fairly can, you wi L not thnk it a
"'Be firm, be courageoum, be men. Peace,
pwrt.of a general conspiracy to alarmn all law, and order, have prevailed on our side-let
the people in this neighbourhood:-tlhem be revered until our brethren in Scotland,

196
Wales, and Ireland, arl informed of your re
lution; and when a universal holiday prevails,
which will be the case in eight days, of what use
will bayonets be against public opinion ?"
Of course, of no use; if the people were
not going to fight there would be nothing
to fight withal; if a universal holiday
were to take place, and parliament
would take the matter into consideration, there would be no use in forcing
the people, at the point of the bayonet,
to work for 7d. or 8d. a-piece. None
at all. If the strike continues for eight
days, depend upon it you will carry the
Charter. Not by bayonet; mark !-but
by " order." " Peace, law, and order,
having prevailed pn oui side,-let. them
be revered"-they will carry it through
the rest. That is my construction, is it
not a fair one ? " Peace, law, and order
have prevailed on our side,"-let them
be revered; and mark my words, said
the proclamation, you will carry the
Charter. I submit to you that that is
the reasonable construction to be put on
it, by persons in your situation.
"What tyrant can then live above the terrible
tide of thought and energy, which is now flowing
'fast, under the guidance of man's intellect, which
is now destined by a Creator to elevate his people above the reach of want, the rancour of
despotism, and the penalties of bondage ?"
That is Ossian again-The same argument is used again. If you do not return
to your work, those that hold out against
you"The trades, a noble, patriotic band, have
taken the lead in declaring for the Charter, and
drawing their gold from the keeping of tyrants.
Follow their example, lend no wip to rulers
werewith to scourge you. Countrymen and
brothers, centuries may roll on, as they have
fleeted past, before such universal action may
again be displayed We have made the cast for
liberty, and we must stand, like men, the hazard
of the die. Let none despond. Let all be cool
and watchful, and, like the bridesmaids in the
parable, keep your lamps burning; and let your
continued resolution be a beacon to guide those
who are now hastening far and wide to follow
your memorable example. Brethren, we rely on
your firmness; cowardice, treachery, and womanly fear, would cast our cause back for half a
century. Let no man or child break down the
solemn pledge, (That is, of going to work again,)

and if they do, may the curse of the poor and
the starving pursue them-they deserve slavery
who would madly court it."
This was Ossian again-a nourishing
proclamation, very poetical and very
pretty, but surely not seditious.
S"Our machinery is all arranged, and your
cause will, in three days, be impelled onward by
all the intellect we can summon to its aid; therefore, whilst you are peaceful, be firm, and whilst
you look to the law, remember that you had no
voice in making it, and are, therefore, the slaves
to the will, the law, and the caprice of your
masters." I believe it is the opinion of many
high authorities that taxation and representation
ought to go hand in hand, and they often heard
that"Laws grind the poor, and rich men make the
laws.
I think that is a line which is in every
body's mouth. It may be, that as the
influence of rich men increases, they may
have a desire to make laws of that character; and the working classes of this
country are inclined to make the law for
themselves. They may be wrong, but,
if they express their opinion in a peaceable manner, and use neither threats,
intimidation, nor violence to bring other
persons over to their own views, they
have a right to do so. I now come to the
The Attorney-General
last seqtence.
relied upon it. I think he relied upon it
by mistake, and as that mistake is liable
to do great harm, I think in justice to
my client, it ought to be removed.
" All officers of the Association are called
upon to aid and assist in the peaceful extension
of the movement, and to forward all monies for
the use of delegates, who may be expressed over
the country. Strengthen our hands at this crisis.
Support your leaders. Rally round our sacred
cause, and leave the decision to the God of Justice and of Battle."
My learned friend, the Attorney-General, has put upon the last word of this
sentence, a meaning which I humbly
submit to you in perfect confidence, it
ought not to bear-" that it was calling
upon the people to take arms, and do
battle against those who might oppose"
them." I believe this word, battle, in
this place is applied exactly in the self
same sense as you find it applied in the
address of the national conference to the

197
Chartist public, which was read out of was found in the Northern Star of the
Mr. O'Connor's paper :-" The battle of 20th of August, and is, in fact, the only
justice against injustice of right against evidence against Mr. O'Connor. It is
might ;" and of the poor man against the not evidence against any of the other derich, if he be an oppressor. It is not an fendants; but, having alluded to it by
appeal to the sword. It has no reference way of explaining the last clause of this
to any violent conduct as the learned At- address of the Executive, I will ead it
torney-General seemed to understand; now, and direct your attention torit senit means a moral battle, and not a physi- tence by sentence.
cal battle. What does the address of the
" Brother Chartists,-Those who have steeped
conference, read from the Northern Star you in poverty, and accumulated vast incomes
of the 20th of August, say ? "Our's is
by your labour, have turned upon you even in your
the battle of labour against capital-of distress, and would plunge you yet lower in the
right against might-of justice against gulph of misery."
injustice-and of knowledge against bigotry and intolerance." You see the A man named Wilcox stated in his
appeal to God, was an appeal to Him evidence that the turn-out was attributable
as the God of Justice-and not as the to the owners of certain manufactories,
God of battles, as he is called in our who forced the work people out, having
Bibles. Not to Him as that great Being first refused them those terms of accomto
who guides the wars of the world, but modation which they had a right
as that just Being who knows that those expect. That shows the meaning of the
contentions between man and man, ought fitst sentence. Wilcox's evidence exto be settled, and will be settled, and plains it.
"Failing to purchase your aid for the accorwhen they are settled, they will be settled
in favour of right. I know I am not plishment of their own sordid ends, they have
fit to speak on such high matters, but effectually put into force the doctrine that 'man
when you read these words, the reason- has a right to do what he likes with his own'
able man-the candid mind, will put that and, in the hope of starving you into compliance
interpretation on them which is put upon with their will, they have paralized the hand of
them, by those persons with whom I am labour-of the old and the young. Yea, infancy
associated in this defence. Gentlemen, I and old age are alike instruments in their hands
have read through that address, only be- for enhancing the interests of their order."
cause it was proved to have been posted at
Todniorden, where my client lives. Had it " They have not dealt fairly by you in
that is a fair
not been posted at Todmorden, I should the matter of wages"not have troubled myself on the subject. commentary on that passage, thougit
It is evidence. Against whom is it evi- rounded so well in words.
"Willing still to labour for a bare pittance,
dence ? Brooke had nothing to do with
the concocting, the printing, or the posting and watching events peacefully which might lead
of it. He had no connection with it in to the attainment of your just rights, and thereby
any way whatever. But, because it was render you independent of the oppressor's will,
found at Todmorden, I would rather take you were cast upon the wide world for support.
that way of explaining it to you which I Thanks-eternal thanks to the brave and in.
Now, gentlemen, I have dependent trades of Manchester! they saw tie
have done.
spoken of the address mentioned by the evil, and nobly threw their comparative comfort
conference. I wonder whether it will into misery's scale. They have struck, not for
fatigue you, but it must be read at one wages, but for principle: and, regardless of contime or the other, and, with your leave, sequences to themselves, they have taken the
I will read it without much observation. foreground in your cause. They have declared
I shall show to you that it was not an
that they will cease to toil till all labour shall be
argument at all in favour of strife and
opinion, cannot
confusion, but an argument in favour of justly requited; which, in their
those rights which the people thought be effected till the Charter become law."
had been violated. It was an argument It is still the same argument from beof peace and order, which it inculcated ginning to end. The people we are adrom beginning to end. Gentlemen, it dressing want better wages, and they
o
f

198
will not get them till the Charter goaded you into resistance, and who would now
is the law of the land--till a legislative torture you, because you do resist. Be not deenactment makes us better represented ceived; for although the discomfited Whigs have

in the House of Commons, and then our attempted to rally their scattered forces under
rights will be protected for us, as others' this new pretext, yet will all of their order in
That is the fair
rights are for them.
construction of this passage:-"Must not their names be handed down to
posterity as patriots sacrificing their own convenience and comfort for the attainment of that of
their fellow-men ? Who can withhold praise from
such men? You have not struck-you have been
stricken; but let the stroke recoil upon the tyrants who have so cruelly arrayed themselves
against the interests of labour.
"Brothers, these are not times to hesitate!
The corn has a golden hue while your visages
are pale, but hope for change and better times.
We are fortunate in having an accredited
executive, bearing the confidence of all, at our
head. eoohaecleupnyuYead.wi"
h
"They, too, have called upon you. You will
read their address :it breathes a bold and manly
spirit."fnolg
I say it does, and I have read it to you
that you may see that that "bold and
manly spirit," is such as may be lawfully
possessed by people having no desire to
bring about a change in the constitution
by force of arms, but by peaceable and
moral agitation, by which changes have
already been effected in the laws of this
country.
"We could not, in times like the present,
withhold from them, your servants, our cordial
support, as in union alone is security to be
found, and from unanimity alone can success be
expected."
This

is not

a -voluntary

"holiday."

society, of whatever shade in polities, join
with them in throwing upon you the odium
which belonst oropesr.
which belongs to your oppressors."
I do riot quite agree with the sentiment contained in that. I do not at
all believe that the Whigs are discomfited; or, if they are, that they are such
great blockheads, and such illiberal men,
as to throw on another party the odium
which does not belong to them.
On
the contrary, if any party were to do
so it would be that party who, all their
lives long, had professed discomfited
principles.
But heed them not. [And then comes the
battle."] Our's is the battle of labour against
capital-mof poverty against property-of right
again miice
st
aganinustice-and
of knowledge against bigotry and intolerance.
" This is a holiday, proclaimed not by nature;
most unnaturally proclaimed! and maythe wicked
fall into the pit which they have dug. Let
union andpeace be the watchword. We counsel
you against waging warfare against recognised
authority, while we believe the moral strength
of an united people to be sufficiently powerful,
when well directed, to overcome all the physical
force that tyranny can summon to its aid. The
blood of your brothers has been shed while
peacefully agitating for their rights, and the
brave delegates of the trades of Manchester have
been scattered from their place of meeting at the
point of the bayonet."

It is the forced "strike"of ill-requited
labour against the dominion of all-powerful capital. But as the tyrants have
forced the alternative upon you, adopt it

I don't think they were peacefully
agitating for their rights when the civil
force were opposed to them. Still this
opinion may be built on wrong evidence,

-and
out of the oppressor's threat, let
freedom spring. While we have not been
the originators of, we are yet bold enough
to say to those who adopt the oppressor's
remedy, stick to it, rather than become
tools for your own destruction; and may
be, who has a bit to spare, and would refuse it to men struggling for their rights,
feel the gripe of hunger, and the still
more stinging grief of a crying offspring!
"Brothers,-Ifweare worthyofyourconfidence,
we must prove that we merit your esteem. Hear
us then, and mark well our admonition ! Let no

and the whole character of the agitation
may be utterly harmless.
"'Yet will the friends of justice ever find a
refuge as long as nature's canopy stands, and so
long as those for whom they struggle stand by
them.
t
"As the people appear to have made the
'strike of the League,' for a repeal of the Cornlaws, into a stand for principle and the Charter,
we would implore every man, loving justice, and
having a shilling at his command, to advance it,
upon the good understanding, that free labour

199
" Brothers, the trades have issued a noble
address. It breathes a spirit worthy of old laws
and old English liberties. This, brothers, is the
time for courage, prudence, caution, watchfulness, and resolution.
" In conclusion, brothers, we would above all
things, 'counsel you against the destruction of
life or property.
" Remain firm to your principles, which are
to be found in the document entitled the People's
Charter.
" Men, be wise! do not commit yourselves or
your cause. Let all your acts be strictly legal
and constitutional, and, ere long, your enemies
will discover that labour is, in truth, the source
of all wealth, and should be the only source of
power."
Now, I confess, that in that, the reigning sentiment-I think they are not very
far mistaken. I believe that to the industry of the people" Of that bold peasantry-the country's pride
That once destroyed can never be supplied."
I believe that it is to the working classes
that England is indebted, not only for
the great advancement of the morality of
its people, but for its power as a nation.
I feel a strong sympathy for the working
classes, and a desire to promote their
true happiness.
Whatever greatness
England has achieved as a commercial
nation-whatever advances she has made
in all the characteristics of a great people
-to whatever point of refinement the
means of national and individual comfort
has arisen, she owes it all to the skill, the
industry, and the perseverance of her artisans, and I look with the greatest comfort
and delight, to any plan for bettering the
condition of the people, whether by educating them better, or by giving them better laws to protect their labour, or by reconciling them by gentleness and kindness, to live happily and contentedly under the institutions of the country. Gentlemen, I think that last sentence ought
not to be thrown against the Chartists" Your enemies will discover that labour
is in truth the source of all wealth, and
should be the only source of power."
Gentlemen, I fear that I have detained
you-perhaps (considering that I appear
only for one, and have but a very small
part of this very large case,) I ought to
have done; but it gives me satisfaction to

lieved from the trouble of hearing me any
more. Upon your hands, and to you,
gentlemen, I now throw and confide the
interests of Brooke, of Todmorden. If
you, in your conscience, believe that he
went as a delegate for the purpose of
bringing about changes in fundamental
points of the constitution, by force,
threats, and intimidation, then, in point
of justice, you ought to give in a verdict
against him; but if you think that he
went there for the purpose, as I have it
from the two witnesses for the prosecution, of meeting the other delegates to
make matters legal in the Chartist organization, and to harmonize together those

points of dispute between the leaders-if
that was his errand, and if that errand
was coupled with being present at the celebration of the opening of Hunt's monument on the 16th of August-then,
though the strike took place, you are not

to blame him.

I defy the wit of man to

say that he was present at any riotous or

tumultuous assembly-that a finger of
his was ever raised, or a word of his ever
spoken-that he took any part directly
or indirectly in any violent prpceeding. If
so, then you are entitled, gentlemen, to give
a favourable consideration to his case,
apart and by himself, and acquit him of
this charge.
Mr. BAINES :-May it please your
Lordship; gentlemen of the jury, I have
the misfortune to be called at the end of
a long and fatiguing day to the defence
of my client, James Scholefield, and I will
promise you, that I will not detain you long
in the investigation of the very slight evidence which the Grown has laid before

you. Allow me to say, that I have some
right to expect your patient attention, for

throughout this protracted enquiry, no
counsel at this table has retarded it by a

lengthened cross-examination, less than I
have. I am sure you will have observed,
that to only two or three of the witnesses
called, have I thought it necessary to address a single question; feeling it necessary to render this trial as short, and as
simple as possible; because in the brevity
and simplicity of any trial, consists the
best defence of that client whom one believes to be innocent. Gentlemen, if you
apply your minds to the rules which the
Attorney-General laid down in the out-

200
any person here on mere suspicion, but
only on unquestionable proof that he
was taking a part in the particular conspiracy laid in the indictment, If you
act on this rule-and there is no other on
which you can act-my client is as safe
as any one of the by-standers which
crowd this court. Gentlemen, allow me
to say this, that I feel called upon, in.
,common with my friends, and those defendants who will speak on their own behalf, by-and-bye, to complain loudly of
the course the Crown has taken in the
present prosecution. Not that I blame
the Crown for instituting a fair trial,
if there was ground for a trial; but,
for having preferred before you such an
indictment as this, I do most certainly
-give, so far as my judgment can give, the
testimony of my sincere and heartfelt
disapprobation to the course pursued.
Did ever man living hear of an indictment comprising the cases of fifty-nine
different defendants ? I say this indictmnent is a perfect monster. No such
thing ever existed since the earliest state
trial we read of in our books down to the
present time. It is the first instance of
the kind, and I hope it will be the last;
for a scheme more fraught with injustice
Io those called upon to answer at this
trial (I hope inadvertently adopted by
those who advised the Crown on this occasion) than this indictment, including,
as it does, fifty-nine persons; imposing
on the judge and jury a task of greater
difficulty than I have ever read of as being imposed on judge or jury before, and
what is of more consequence than that,
imposing on the defendants a hardship
and a grossness of severity which it is
utterly impossible to estimate. The most
experienced counsel that ever addressed
a jury may well doubt of his ability to
present each case in its own peculiar and
distinctive features before that jury who
are to try the guilt or innocence of his
.client. Gentlemen, if that be so with
respect to the most experienced counsel,
how must it be with respect to those men
-who now stand before you on their trial,
some of whom have not, for want of
.neans, the advantage of appearing before
you by counsel; and every one of whom
is expected to single out from this enormous
mass of matter, (which theAttorney-Gene'a! has been five days bringingbefore you)

the evidence bearing on his own particular case, call your attention to it individually and take your sense upon it. I do
say that to ruh a hardship I have never
known any defendant subjected in my
life. And, surely, there is no occasion
for it. It is perfectly well known to
criminal lawyers that, in a charge of this
kind, it is perfectly competent for the
Crown to try the defendants on several
indictments. Had the Attorney-General
presented five or six indictments to the
jury instead of one, it would have been
much to the advantage of the Court, and
more in accordance with the fundamental
principles of justice, which is the object
of all law. From what I know of the
Attorney-General, I am sure he would
not intentionally impose on these men
any hardship; and yet a greater hardship than these men have been subject
to by the mode in which this enquiry has
been brought before you, it is impossible
for the imagination of man to conceive.
And the thing would be far worse if his
Lordship adopted the view which the
Attorney-General was disposed to take at
the end of the prosecution. Then it was
discovered, that it would be for the
advantage of the Crown to depart a little
from that course, which I understood to
be laid down by the Attorney-General
in his opening. So far from adducing
evidence to determine whether there had
been a conspiracy by force and violence
to prevent the free exercise of labour, or
to continue a cessation from labour, in
order to bring about a change in the
laws and constitution of this country,
and whether the defendants, or any of
them, had taken any part in that cons
spiracy; an attempt was made to try
to affect one defendant by one kind of
evidence, and another defendant by another kind of evidence. Each of the nine
counts in the indictment was to be applied to each of the defendants. And
observe what may be the effect of it. I
have made the calculation-there are
fifty-nine defendants, and nine counts
in the indictment; and if you multiply
fifty-nine by nine, the result will be five
hundred and thirty-one. That, gentlemen, will be the number of questions
which his Lordship will have to submit
to you, for he will be obliged to submit
every count with respect to each defen.

201
dant. If the course had been adopted,
which the legal ingenuity of my learned
friend suggested, and you had to determine whether or not a certain portion of
a count was made out against .d. or B.,
it would be quite impossible to tell how
far these subdivisions might have been
carried ; and so far from you having any
assignable period at which you could
have hoped for a termination of your
labour, it would be quite impossible to
say when you might have finished.
Having made these observations, which
pressed so much on my mind, and, I am
afraid, will press, with greater severity, on
the defendants who stand here to plead
their own cause, allow me to call your
attention to the case of my client. This
James Scholefield, of whom you have
heard, has carried on the profession of a
Dissenting minister in the town of Manchester, for a period of more than twenty
years; he having succeeded to the chapel
of, and office of the late Mr. Cowherd,
the founder of the sect, of which my
client is now a minister. Mr. Cowherd
died about the year 815. He combined
the practice of physic with divinity. He
was minister of the sect, called " Cowherdites," and sometimes " Bible Christians." He was an apothecary. My
client carried on both professions in
the same way that his master and
tutor did before him, and conducts
himself in the same way that his master
and tutor did. I am not here to disguise
from you, that, in point of political opinions, my client goes with those who are
called Chartists. He thinks conscientiously that their opinions are right.
You, gentlemen, do not. He thinks
conscientiously-after mature reflection,
and after availing himself of all those
lights which are furnished to him, that
the adoption of the six points of the
Charter, would be the means of securing
to the greatest number of the people of
this country, the greatest amount ot comnfort of which they are capable. That is
his opinion, and you will find also, that
he is of opinion, that great respect ought
to be paid to the sentiments of the late
Henry Hunt. You will find, that it is
on that account he has taken an active
part in the erection of that monument to
his memory, of which monument, you
have heard so much in the course of

the evidence. These opinions of his,
however erroneous, or however much
mistaken my client may be in holding them, are held by him very sincerely. He thinks he has recognized in
Mr. Feargus O'Connor -the defendant
before you, and who will plead his
own cause, by-and-bye, a worthy representative of the political opinions which
the defendant has espoused. The working classes of the country are under obligations of the highest kind to him. In
that gentleman thousands of the working
classes recognised a man connected with
the highest ranks of the aristocracy in
Ireland, and yet identifying himself, with
the cause of the working men of this
country, in such a manner as to entitle
himself to their lasting gratitude. Mr.
Feargus O'Connor and my client are
both at heart of the same prirciples, and
both are conscientiously labouring for the
same end. So far from repudiating the
opinions of Mr. O'Connor, my client
claims it as an honour to be his acquaintance, and to coincide in his views.
You will find under what circumstances
Mr. O'Connor came to Mr. Scholefield's
house on the 17th of August. He desires me to state before you what his
opinions are, and to claim for them
that respect and indulgence which has
been so eloquently claimed for those of
the defendants generally, by my learned
friend who has addressed you.
My
client wishes those opinions to be carried into effect by legal and peaceable
means. He never had a wish to carry
them into effect in any other manner.
And his opinions, however you may
differ from them, he is entitled to carry
into effect to the best of his power. I
cannot help expressing my entire concurrence as an advocate in the sentiment,
that for every set of speculative opinions
there should be the most unlimited indulgence. You should have the means
given to every man, without controul,
of advocating them warmly, evidently,
and incessantly.
All this should be
given to every man, and if you ever see
a state of society in which that is not
the case, it will be a state of tyrannya state of prosecution or persecution.
Against the peaceful support of any set
of opinions whatever-however wrong
they may be in point of speculative ef-

202
fe$, if argued calmly, peaceably, and
poperly, and submitted to the people
for their free choice, no obstacle should
be opposed, for I have the most confident opinion in the omnipotence of truth,
and believe that, if it has fair play, it
must ultimately triumph and prevail.
Before I call your attention to the facts of
the case, I beg, for a single moment, to
allude to the position laid down by my
learned friend the Attorney-General on
the other side, which position will be
most important for you as regards the
law of the case. You will, by-and-bye,
permit me to say a word or two on this
topic. To say no more of their opinions,
I cannot but remark, that there never
was a set of men (and I am not here to
advocate their opinions before the judge)
who have had to struggle more against
prejudices than the defendants, and that
of late. A most extraordinary illustration of this has been given within the
last few months, of the length to which
those prejudices have gone. I say this,
gentlemen, for the purpose of warning
you. You will forgive me if I do so
when prejudice is strong and general;
but when I say so, it is now a matter of
notoriety, that the magistrates of the
whole county of Stafford, felt it their
bounden duty to exclude a man from the
ordinary privileges of a British subject,
(namely, standing forward to give bail
for a fellow-citizen,) on the sole ground
that he was a Chartist, and for no other
assignable cause. This shows the extent
of the prejudice against Chartists, and
it shows how careful we ought to be,
especially those who sit in judgment on
a person with whose political opinions
they have no sympathy. Do not let us
allow a want of sympathy with my
client's opinions, to require one jot less
if evidence against him, than we should
require against the man with whose
opinions we had the most perfect coincidence.
As to the points of the
Charter, I shall not discuss them. None
'f them is subversive of the foundations of society, so far as morals are coneerned. We have heard of some sects
where that has been the case, and hence
some have been led to look with prejudice on all who belong to sects of any
Aind. But these men-the defendants
in this case, are endeavouring to carry

into effect opinions which were held by
some of the wisest and best men that
lived before them. I may say of a great
many of those defendants, that you will
find them to be the best husbands and
fathers; brothers and sons whom you
can meet with anywhere.
However
wrong and speculative their political opinions may be, there is nothing in them
inconsistent with the soundest morality.
They set an example which might be
imitated with great benefit by many who
pretend to despise their persons and abuse
their principles. Having performed that
act of common justice to the defendants
generally, I now come to my client,
Scholefield, who occupies a leading place.
My client, Scholefield, occupies a leading and prominent part in this affair.
He was acting up to the light that is in
him for the promotion of those principles
which he considers best for the public
weal. I shall now call attention to that
point of law, which the Attorney-General noticed in this case. I consider this
of great importance to be understood
here; and when it is understood, I have
not the least objection to leave it to your
consideration, when you come to look at
the evidence against my client. The
Attorney-General said, "Here is a charge
of conspiracy, and the law of England
with respect to conspiracy is this :-That
where parties are engaged in pursuit of a
common purpose, for the act which one
may do, in pursuance of that common
purpose, all the rest are responsible."
From that proposition, as thus laid down
briefly, I beg to express my unqualified
dissent.
Mr. DUNDAS :-Hear!
Mr. BAINES :-His Lordship will, of
course, lay down the law, and you are
bound to take the law from him; but to
that proposition I express my unqualified
dissent. It is true that where parties are
combined, and the ultimate object of
those parties is illegal, any act which one
may do in pursuance of that common
object, the rest are responsible for it, but
it is not so where the ultimate object of
the parties is legal. I defy any one to
say that that which the Attorney-General
laid down is correct, for, if it were, see
the consequences which would follow.
You and I may be combined together for
the promotion of some purpose which we

203
may think in our conscience to be very
just, and which is just in itself. I do
some foolish and wicked things in order
to carry out the object in view-I act
upon that worst and foulest of moral
maxims-" Do evil that good may come."
Are you to be affected by my conduct in
that respect ? certainly not. And yet
we are bound up in one common purpose.
Now that which was the common purpose
of the defendants was as legal a purpose
as could be. I am not discussing its
wisdom or policy; but, in point
of legality, there can be no doubt
but that for these men to combine
for the Charter, was as legal a purpose as
ever bound men together in this world.
Yet, if any man were to be bound by the
acts of another because he was bound up
with him in one common purpose, just
observe how gross an absurdity it would
lead to; and, no doubt, you will hear
from my Lord how gross an illegality.
Here are certain persons all of opinion,
that the passing of the Reform Bill
would be a very good thing; and they
go to work, and carry out their several
plans for effecting the common purpose.
One thinks he will do so by firing the
city of Bristol; another, by insulting and
assaulting a police officer; a third, by
peaceful means. The ultimate object is
the same. They wish to bring about a
change in the laws, but the third man is
not to be held responsible for the
folly and violence of the other two.
Let us take another illustration. Here
are certain persons banded together for
the common purpose of turning the hands
out of a particular manufactory. One of
those persons makes a most violent and
inflammatory speech against the poorof the most excitable subjects
on which the mind can be addressed;
another makes an attack on the character
of the amiable and excellent sovereign,
under whose rule we have the happiness
to live; and a third seeks to accomplish
his purpose by reason and argument.
Now it is perfectly obvious that the common purpose is strictly legal, and that
it would be the greatest hardship in the
world, to bind the third man by that
which is done by the other two. These
are obvious reasons, and they strike one
as being so just, that you must at once
see the distinction between a case where

law-one

the ultimate object is a legal one, and
where it is illegal. Where the common
object is illegal, I submit that the one is
the agent of the other, both in point of
law and common sense; and the result
must be visited on the head of each, but,
where the object is legal, each must be
visited by his own act.
Mr. DUNDAS :-That is right.
Mr. BAINES :-If you adopt a different principle how can men engage together for the accomplishment of any
common purpose, however legitimate or
praiseworthy, for any one of their number
may, by an overt act of folly or wickedness, bring ruin upon the heads of all
those who are engaged with him in pursuance of the one common object? I now
respectfully but earnestly ask you to keep
that in view, when considering the several cases of these defendants before you,
and, particularly, in considering the case
of him for whom I have now the honour,
peculiarly to appear as advocate. Gentlemen, I now beg your attention to a
word or two on the evidence in this case,
as it regards Mr. Scholefield. I know
how great a draft has been made on your
patience already-I have marked it with
gratitude, and no one here can fail to have
observed your patient attention. I be
lieve, in my conscience, that it requires,
so far as my client is concerned, the
greatest degree of attention on your
part, to secure for him a complete
acquittal. What then is the evidence in
this matter as it regards Mr. Scholefield ?
He is not affected by any of the evidene
with which, for three long days, th
Crown occupied the attention of the
Court. It was not till ten o'clock on
Saturday morning that Mr. Scholefield
was mentioned at all. I will take up
the history at this time, and when the
facts of this case are brought before you,
then say if the case of Scholefield is a
case of guilt, or even of suspicion. Gentlemen, we have it in evidence before us,
that ever since the melancholy affair which
took place on the 16th of August, 1819,
there was a strong feeling in favour of
the principles advocated by Henry Hunt.
There was a strong feeling of reverence
for him, as the champion of those principles. Never has one single year passed,
since that period, without some kind of
commemoration of the events of that day

204
We have this fact from the witnesses.
Beswick says, that this has been the case
for a period of seventeen years.
Now,
about two years ago, it was determined
to erect a monument to the memory
of Henry Hunt. My client, Mr. Scholefield, determined to give a piece of a
burial ground attached to his chapel, for
the purpose of erecting this monument.
In the spring of last year, the first stone
of that monument was laid by Mr.
Feargus O'Connor, who came to Manchester for that purpose. It excited the
greatest interest among all those who intended to pay respect to the memory of
the late Henry Hunt, and it was determined
that the monument should be completed
in time for the anniversary, the 16th of
August. To carry that object into effect
it was determined that the means should
be raised by a committee, called the
Hunt's Monument Committee; and that
they should, if possible, complete the
monument time enough to have it opened
on the 16th of August following.
In
June, Griffin came to Manchester. At
this time he had dissolved all connection
with Mr. O'Connor. Griffin, being then
out of employment, was in great distress,
and he applied to Mr. Scholefield for
assistance. My client, with that benevolence which always formed a conspicuous part of his character, gave him
the money he asked for, and also gave
him the painting and graining of his
chapel-the painting being the trade
which Griffin was brought up to. In
that very week, Griffin became the secretary to the Hunt's monument committee.
This was in the second or third week of
June-a month before the turn-out,and the monument was to be completed
almost immediately after that--on the
16th of August. In June, the Hunt's
monument committee determined to send
out circulars, requesting the attendance
of delegates from all parts of the country. And
order to give as much eclat
as possible to the occasion, the delegates
were to attend for the triple purpose of
opening the monument with all due solemnity; this being thought by them, at
all events, a national concern. Next, to
heal certain differences between certain
leaders of the Chartist party. That was
thought an object of importance, for so
long as those differences existed in the

in

'body

the efficiency of the institution was
necessarily impaired, and, therefore, it
was necessary that those differences should
be done away with. The third object in
view, as Griffin and Cartledge stated, was
to revise the organization of the Chartist
body throughout the country. For what
purpose, pray you, did these conspirators
meet? To see whether the Chartist body,
as then constituted, had any, even the
slightest illegality in it, in order that
such illegality might be removed. These
were the objects for which the conference
assembled. If the conference had assembled
without any assignable motive-if we had
not been able to trace the object for which
it assembled, and trace it distinctly, the
Crown might have some ground for asking you, gentlemen of the jury, to take a
leap in the dark, andcome to the conclusion
that these men had assembled for no
legal purpose whatever. But the delegates had these three purposes for assembling, every one of which was as legal as
any subject which the human mind can
entertain.
They had these three purposes to bring them together months before the disturbances began; and they
did, for these purposes, present themselves in Manchester on the 16th of August. Now, that I take to be clear, and
we have it from the evidence on the part of
the Crown. Mr. Dundas referred to a
placard which was issued by the Hunt's
monument committee, announcing the
intended procession and opening of the
monument. In every one of the documents issued by that committee, there
was not a single syllable to contravene
the meaning of the words "peace, law
and order." The outbreak occurs on the
9th or 10th, and the magistrates of Manchester did not, for two or three days
afterwards, appear to take the alarm. At
all events, the proclamation was not issued
till the 14th of August. But the Hunt's
monument committee-who are now
charged with being little less then a band
of conspirators, whose object was to subvert the good order and constitution of
society-these men interfered to preserve the peace of the town before even
the magistrates interfered; for it was on
the morning of the 10th, that Mr. Scholefield sent outplacards announcing, thattin
consequence of the turn-out, the Hunt's
monument committee thought it their

205
duty to lay aside their advertised inten- the committee deem it the most advisable, safe,
tion of having the procession, which and judicious course to be pursued, under the
might produce a collision, the blame of circumstances, to abandon the Procession anwhich might be laid on the Chartists, nounced to take place on the 16th of August;
and the consequences of which every- and that the Press be requested to insert this
body might deplore. Gentlemen, let us resolution and short address in their current
view a man's conduct, for God's sake, publications.
together. Do not single out a particular
" The district is certainly in a very unsettled
passage, without having any opportunity state, and the members of the committee believe
of seeing the rest. At all events, do not that if any disturbance ensued on that day, the
let us do by it as that reporter did from enemies to the Chartist movement would snatch
the .MIanchester Guardian, who gave a

limb of the sentence, which my client
uttered at Carpenters' Hall, without being able to tell you in the least degree
what the context was. No, in looking
at a man's language and conduct, the
only fair and reasonable way is to take,
not isolated passages, but the whole to*gether, and see what the fair inference
from the whole is. I desire nothing
more at your hands, gentlemen. I venture to hope, from what I have seen
on this enquiry, you will grant me
nothing less. This takes place on
the 10th. Let us proceed a little inthe
order of time. On the 14th, it appears
the magistrates of Manchester-O, I was
going to pass over one document which
my learned friend did not call attention
to. We have had one doeument brought
before us to day- the document of the
11th of August. My learned friend
passed it over at the time, perhaps, supposing that he should refer to it' afterwards. This is the document of the 11th
of August, signed-William Griffin, on
behalf of the committee; at the head of
whom was my client, Mr. Scholefield.
He was the person who guided the
whole, and was let speak in this circular.
"THE HUNT MONUMENT COMMITTEE.
STo the Chartists of Manchester, and the
surrounding towns and villages.-The Committee appointed to superintend the erection of a
Monument to the memory of the late Henry
Hunt, Esq., feel sorrow at having to inform you,
and those other friends who had intended to
honour us with their presence at the procession on the 16th of August, that after duly
considering upon the present awful an truly

at the opportunity, and throw the blame on the
committee and the Chartists generally. They
perceive that the Manchester Guardian has
already began to charge the Chartists as the
originators of, and as taking part in, the disturbances already had. A. charge as false as it
cowardly and malicious.
" The meeting, respecting the monument,
will be holden on the 16th of August, in the
Rev. James Scholefield's burial ground, Everystreet. The ground is private property; and
the meeting will, therefore, be strictly safe and
legal. The delegates are expected to be here
according to previous announcement; likewise
Feargus O'Connor, Esq. The tea party and
ball will also be holden in the evening, for
which all due arrangements are being made.
" In adopting this course, the committee feel
that they best consult the interest and safety of
the Chartist cause. Were they to go on with
the procession, and bring upon them the interference of the magistracy, tumult might be the
consequence. Life would be endangered, blood
spilled, and our righteous movement greatly
endangered and retarded. We want to obtain
the Charter by moral, peaceable, and constitutional means, and not by force and tumult.
"Signed on behalf of the committee,
Wi. GRIFFIN, Secretary.
" August 11th, 1842."

Gentlemen, if there is any sense in that,

you must say that the man who dictated
that (as Mr. Scholefield did to Griffin,
who was then his secretary,) couldnot be
but a good and peaceable subject. So
On the 14th, he
much for the 11 th.
discovered that it was necessary to issue
a proclamation, prohibiting all procesalarming state of this district, and after every sions and meetings:" The committee forthe erection of Hunt's
member present had given his opinion upon the
matter, the following resolution was passed una- monument respectfully informs the public, that,
nimously :-"That, ;taking all things into consideration,

in consequence of the very unexpected exciteof Manchester and its vicinity,

Iment of the town

206
occasioned by the ' turn-out for an advance of
wages,' they have decided that the procession as
announced in former bills, for the 16th of August, 1842, ' will not take place,' lest it should
give an opportunity to increase that excitement,
the odium and consequences of which have been
attempted to be fixed on the Chartist body.
" The meeting will be held on the premises
of the Rev. J. Scholefield, where the monument
can be seen. The gates will be opened at ten
o'clock, and the meeting will be addressed by
Feargus O'Connor, Esq., and other delegates, at
eleven o'clock.
" The tea party and ball, as by former bills,
will take place in the evening, at Carpenters'
Hall.
" N.B. A number of very neat China models
of the monument have arrived, and will be exposed for sale on that day, at from Is. 4d. to
is. 6d. each; the profits of which are for the
funds of the monument.
" J. SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
On the 15th, out came her Majesty's
proclamation to the same effect. Mr.
Scholefield received this on the night of
the 15th, and at four o'clock in the morning he was up, calling on the printer to
print that other placard, to which Mr.
Dundas has called attention. This placard
shows that the meeting as well as the
procession should be abandoned.
" Procession and Meeting prohibited by the
authorities.-The Committee for the erection of
Hunt's Monument respectfully inform the Public, that, in consequence of the very unexpected
excitement of the town of Manchester and its
vicinity, occasioned by a turn-out for an advance
of wages, they have decided that the procession
and meeting in Mr. Scholefield's premises, as announced in former bills for the 16th of August,
1842, will not take place, lest it should give an
opportunity to increase that excitement, the
odium and consequences of which have been attempted to be fixed on the Chartist body.
" The tea party and ball, as by former bills,
will take place in the evening, at Carpenters'
Hall.
"N.B. A number of very neat china models
of the monument have arrived, and will be exposed for sale on that day, at from ls. 4d. to
is. 6d. each; the profits of which are for the

disposition to avoid everything that could
by any possibility lead to tumult or confusion. I believe he advised those acting
with them, instantly and strenuously to
do every thing in a peaceable and constitutional manner. Mr. Scholefield was
out early in the morning of the 16th, obtaining placards. He ad a very large
number posted on the walls of Manchester. They were sent to his house that
very forenoon, and you will find by the
witness, Bell, who was sent to watch the
house--I am sure it son was Lord's note
-- that Scholefield's was my putting
up
those peaceable
lacardsons iather'sup
walls :-placards exhorting the people to
w peaceable
be
and orderly, and telling
them
peaceable and orderly, and proes-lling
sion were now finally put off. Here
then, you have the conduct of Scholefield traced through a series of dates,
down to the 16th of August, and it requires no more but to add one or two
facts which I shall do, by and bye,' in
order to complete our view of his conduct. Mr. Scholefield, as I have told you,
was out early in the morning of the 15th,
in order to have those placards printed.
Mr. O'Connor had arrived, in the course
He
of that morning, from London.
knew and respected Mr. Scholefield, and
felt convinced, that, though he was not
announced or expected, he would not be
an unwelcome guest under Mr. Scholefield's roof. When Mr. Scholefield returned, he found Mr- O'Connor there.
You will remember, that all those delegcrates were invited to Manchester for the
purpose of holding this meeting. As it
was to take place on Mr. Scholefield's
ground, they naturally flocked to his
house as a place of rendezvous, and thus
it was, that Bell (who seems to have
been sent by the Manchester police, and
whom you have had an opportunity of
seeing give his evidence with so much
solemnity from that box,) saw some of
them. He says, " O, I saw delegate so
and so, coming to Mr Scholefield's house
on that day. These men were summonScho field's phurposesbeing on the exactnd
alr
spot, what was so natural as that they
should come to him to enquire why the

funds of the monument.
matter was not as they were led to
" J. SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
expect. They met with Mr. O'Connor
This shows that Mr. Scholefield had a there, and that is the mighty matter of

207
suspicion, so far as the 16th of August is
The meeting was to take
concerned.
place on his private ground. They did
not know that; for it was cnly on the
morning of that day, that that management was announced. At what time did
that meeting take place ? I thought we
should hear of these meetings as midnight
doings, but it was in broad day-light
this was done; and the delegates were
seen at four o'clock in the afternoon,
coming out of a public street in Manchester, and going to Mr. Scholefield's house
in the most open and unguarded way.
For aught they knew, a policeman was
at every corner; but they, being innocent
of any improper intention, knew they
might call on Mr. Scholefield and Mr.
O'Connor, and they did call. The history of the evidence given by Bell, which
I shall never for a moment deny, is that
the delegates called at Mr. Scholefield's
house on the 16th, and that he saw Mr.
O'Connor and some of them going into
the chapel in the course of the day, and,
on the following day, he saw M'Douall
coming out of the chapel. In the evening of that day (the 16th) I observed
another matter spoken of by the Crown
witnesses, to which I beg to call your attention. That is the evidence given this
morning by one of the witnesses. The
Crown has not exactly followed the
order of time, but I wish to make the
thing plain and intelligible, and, therefore, I beg you to follow me through one
or two more dates. In the evening of
this day, a tea party was held in Carpenters' Hall, and Mr. Hanly, a reporter, is
called to speak to what was said on that
occasion. Now, as to that gentleman's
respectability, I have not the slightest
doubt, nor do I wish to say one word to
make you think otherwise of him; but it
isamost dangerous way of laying evidence
before a jury, to give in what lie told you
was an imperfect note of what passed.
Mr. Hanly entered the room and found
Mr. Scholefield speaking. He (Mr.
IHanly) crushed his way up to the platform, and while taking out his note book
he heard part of a sentence, or the
whole of a sentence, which he afterwards
wrote down. Now, supposing him to
be accurate in his recollection, there is
nothing in that sentence which can
affect my client; " The day of the peo-

ple was long in coming, but wnen it
comes it will come with a vengeance!"
The sentence may be thus explained:
Hunt's testimonial had fallen into a kind
of desuetude; Mr. Scholefield wished to
see the day come, when the recollection
of Hunt s exertions in forwarding certain
political views would be revived; and
now the day had come with a vengeance.
Indeed, when my client saw such a glorious gathering in that Hall-supposing
that every word which Mr. Hanly stated
was uttered, but the context of which he
did not hear, I ask you, is not that a fair
meaning to put upon it ? But it would
be idle to put any meaning upon words
such as have been given in evidence,
because you did not hear the whole.
You did not hear the context,-and,
therefore, I call upon you to simplify
the matter by dismissing it altogether
from your consideration, especially when
you remember that that gentleman began
his statement respecting the tea party at
Carpenters' Hall, by saying, that he had
taken no votes on that occasion; that
any notes which he had taken, were so
slight as to be regarded as no notes at
all. Now, gentleman, it is unnecessary
to detain you longer on that point.
Well, now we come to the 17th of August-the day these delegates met,-and
what have we? What takes place then ?
Do I deny for a single moment, or did
I by a single question attempt to throw
any doubt upon it, that these parties assembled in Scholefield's chapel ? Unquestionably not. There can be no
doubt at all of that fact. The plain
history of it is this; these gentlemen arrived in town on this errand, and Mr.
Scholefield had no reason to suppose
that their errand was not a perfectly
good and legitimate one-he had no reason to suppose that there was any intention on their part to pervert to any other
purpose, than that originally proposed,
the object of their meeting. Hie was requested by Mr. O'Connor himself, to let
him have the use of his chapel for the
meeting of delegates, which meeting, as
Mr. Scholefield naturally supposed, was
convened for the sake of composing those
differences which existed among the Chartist leaders, for reviewing and amending
the Chartist organization, and celebrating
the anniversary of Henry Hunt. Mr. Fear-

208
gus O'Connor himself required the use
of the chapel for that purpose, and it was
perfectly natural that he should do so;
I may say so on the part of Mr. O'Connor, though I have not the honour of
appearing for that gentleman, but, as Mr.
Scholefield's counsel, I may say, that
nothing could be more natural than
that Mr. O'Connor should apply to
an old friend, whose political opinions
coincided with his own, for the use of
the chapel, to promote a cause equally
dear to both. You remember the evidence given by the witness who was
cross-examined by Mr. Murphy on this
point. You remember that at a previous
meeting, in consequence of the great
popularity of Mr. O'Connor,.great crowds
were collected about Mr. Scholefield's
house, and an obstruction caused by the
multitudes w,ho were desirous of seeing
Mr. O'Connor. What then was more natural than for Mr. O'Connor to say, "let
us have the use of that chapel, it is a
quiet place, we shall have no crowds.
The public peace won't be disturbed.
There will be no risk."-That is the reason why Mr. O'Connor requested Mr.
Scholefield to let him have the use of that
chapel; and that is the reason why Mr.
Scholefield did let him have the use of
that chapel. But it appears that during
that day the delegates assembled,-it appears that during the two periods of
time, at which the delegates assembled,
Mr. Scholefield passed through his own
chapel, and therefore he is to be affected
with a guilty knowledge of all that passed
there. It is not for me to'say that anything criminal occurred on that occasion, but whatever the guilt of other
persons may be-don't let any man say,
that I am here to excuse guilt, but assuming that they were guilty-Mr. Scholefield had nothing to do with it. He passed through the chapel. He stopped to
gossip as he passed through-one of the
witnesses said to give information, but
that was all. When you get further information about the situation of the place,
ruwill see that it was right for him to
vou
e. According to Cartledge and
be ther Mr. Scholefield was neither a
Griffin, nor a member of the condelegate and therefore he had no busiference, end to their discussions. Both
ness to att and Griffin, stated in answer
Cartledge

to questions from me, that none who were
not delegates were permitted to take part in
the discussions.
Mr. Scholefield on
that day was busily engaged in his surgery; he was also engaged in the, I
hope not very blameable, occupation,
of distributing soup tickets to the starving
poor, who crowded his house at the time.
He is one of those who has taken upon
him the benevolent office of providing
for a part of that most grievously distressed population. He was doing that
in the chapel during part of that day.
He had several patients coming to him
that day. l)uring that day he had no
less than four funerals to celebrate in the
burial-ground attached to his premises.
He had a man painting at some gates
at the back of his premises. Mr. Scholefiled went two or three times to see how
the painter was going on. He had to
pass through the chapel several times for
that purpose, and that is his participation
in the guilt of that conspiracy. Oh, I
had nearly forgotten one circumstance,
which was again heralded in by Bell,
who had a great crop of information for
those who employed him. Mr. O'Connor
had been the guest of Mr. Scholefield.
Now the suspicious circumstance to which
I allude is this,-at eight o'clock on
an August morning, Mr. O'Connor was
actually seen coming out of the door of
Mr. Scholefield's house, in Every-street,
getting into a cab, clandestinely, and
driving to the railway station, to which
hlie might have got at three o'clock in the
morning if he thought fit; and if Mr.
O'Connor or Mr. Scholefield had been
conscious of any improper design, which
might render darkness necessary, I beg
to ask you, by which of those trains
would Mr. O'Connor have started? He
leaves Manchester not caring for the presence of a policeman, at eight o'clock,
of an August morning. That, gentlemen, is the last remaining circumstance
of suspicion which can be produced. I
am not permitted by the forms of the
court to appeal to Mr. O'Connor on his
word of honour as a gentleman. I cannot by the forms of law call him as a
witness before you- I only wish I could.
I must only call those witnesses whom I
have it in my power to call. One member of Mr. Scholefield's family-his son,
who is extremely respectable, and lives

209
under his father's roof-he will tell you
as much as you may desire to hear.
With respect to the evidence given on the
part of th Crown against my client, I
can only call witnesses from Mr. Scholefield's own family. But, if I did not call
a single witness, I might with confidence
say,-." Is this Scholefield guilty of a
conspiracy ? Whatever others may have
done-can we, as men of conscience and
honour, lay our hands on our hearts and
say, that we believe, beyond all reasonable doubt, that Mr. Scholefield is guilty
of conspiracy. [Mr. Murphy makes a
a suggestion to Mr. Baines] -Yes, I am
much obliged to my learned friend. It
has escaped my recollection. It was said
by a witness called to-day, that he brought
a sovereign in, and said it was for some
purpose or other connected with Chartism. Now,, he was treasurer to the Hunt
monument committee, and in that capacity, he received the sovereign. How can
that show that he was bound up with
them, in any guilty purpose whatever.
He had one purpose in common with
them, namely, the attainment of the
Charter, and making it the law of the
land; but, he never dreamed of attaining
it by any other than legal and constitutional means. If others have, in a moment of imprudence, gone beyond the
strict line of the law, that is not to be
placed to his account. That is my case,
and for the length to which I have trespassed on your attention, I feel that I
ought to apologize.
Mr. Serjeant MURPHY:-I appear
here for Dr. M'Douall Thomas Railton,
and John Durham. May it please your
Lordship; gentlemen of the jury, if my
learned friend Baines, injaddressingyou on
the present occasion thought proper to
apologize for the length to which the
proceedings had already gone, I feel it
necessary to apologize likewise; for all
the topics to which I can direct your attention, have been so eloquently treated
by my learned friend-though he merely
directed your attention to the case of
Brooke, whose interests were confided to
him-that I feel I should be exercising,
as far as my individual judgment goes,
perhaps a sound discretion in not addressing you at any length, for it will be necessary for me to travel over much of the
Same ground that has been already taken,

and this may have the effect of weakening the impression already made, by that
which has been so eloquently and forcibly stated by my learned friend. I must
s k you in the first instance-for I assure
you it will be my duty to make a few observations on the evidence adduced in
the course of this enquiry-it will be my
object to direct your attention to the evidence pointed at my clients-though not
at any length-I shall not enter into that
discursive range of observation which several of the docume* presented before
you have led my learned friends, who so
eloquently commented on them.
But,
at the same time, I would ask you to recollect this one thing-what is the nature of the charge made to day
Gentlemen, there is nothing which, in our law
books is so clearly laid down as thisthere is no class of offences with which
the subject can be charged so indefinite
in its application, so invariably spoken of
as a net to inveigle the unwary, as this
charge of conspiracy. According to the
definition of the law of conspiracy to be
found in our books, there are classes of
conspiracy where, by the combination of
two persons to do an act which may be
a legal one, and which has been held on
the highest authority to be legal, they
yet may both subject themselves, according to the doctrine laid down by the Attorney-General to day, to this charge. If
the doctrine pronounced by the Attorney-General be the correct exposition of
the law, then it is impossible, as was well
remarked by Mr. Baines, for any two persons to act in cooncert in a matter the
most indifferent, where the imprudence of
one makes him trench on the law, without at the same time involving the other
inthe consequencesof hisact. Gentlemen,
the defendants for whom I appear are
John Durham, Thomas Railton, and
Dr. M'Douall. I shall produce them in
that order, and point out the evidence as
it applies to the three, seriatim. First,
then, with regard to John Durham. It
is quite clear that he was a person in the
position of a workman. He is introduced
early in this transaction-about tile 6th
or 7th of August, and associated with
individuals, who, at the time, broke out
at Stalybridge, where the strike for
wages first took place. It is a fact,

which will appear when his Lordship

210
comes to recapitulate the evidence, that went to work. There no 's single act
Durham, though he was associated with which was not an act of pefect legality.
individuals who marched in procession, And what proof is there against him
and held meetings, that, upon every one with regard to the question of these
of those occasions, when the Charter licenses ? Is it shown on any occasion
came to be discussed, he repudiated that that Durham said, "I will give you a
question, and always said that the ques- license ?"-or that he wrote one of those
tion for which they had met was a licenses? Did he do more than was
wage-question. He told them that every done on former occasions, where the
act which they were to perform was to be workmen having turned out, committees
performed in a peaceable way, and with were appointed to adjust wages P Have
a due regard to order. Now, gentlemen, you it that Durham wrote any of those
if it be true that the law makes it legal licenses ?-or conversed about it ?-or
for workmen todbmbine in order to ar- was present when any conversation on
range between themselves and their the subject took place, except that at one
masters for what they should work, time he said, " We are too busy now to
then what has been the conduct of attend to your application ?" Have you
Durham up to the time when those anything against him except that when
meetings, at Staleybridge, took place ?- the masters refused to receive the working
the supplemental evidence I shall after- people back, he was seen at meetings at
wards comment upon-was not his con- which the Charter was spoken of ? And
duct simply that of a working man, at those meetings he was always for keepdissatisfied with the wages he was re- ing to the question of wages. With
ceiving, and joining with other workmen regard to Railton, I do not know what
to get what they called "a fair day's the evidence is which the Attorneywages for a fair day 's work ?" He met General brought against him. I admit
and combined with them. The witness, that his name appears in the statement
Brierly, tells you that he always repu- of Griffin and Cartledge, as having
diated the consideration of the Charter, been present at the meeting of delegates
and was at those meetings for no other in conference on the 17th of August.
purpose than that which the law gave Gentlemen, it would be idle in me, and,
him a right to-to get from his master a as I said before, it would be weakening
fair remuneration for his labour. That the effect of the address of my learned
was the conduct of Durham. Will you friends who preceded me, if I should do
please to recollect one piece of evidence more than merely cursorily allude to
that has been submitted to you,-will you what has taken place on that occasion.
recollect the evidence of Brierly, who told Does it appear that any speech was
you that the turn-out of the men, at first, made by him on that occasion ? might
was not attributable to the workmen he not have been one of the minority
themselves ? Brierly tells you-I cannot opposed to the resolution then adopted ?
tell you, but it was in the statement of nothing appears respecting him on the
the witness Brierly, that at the time some whole of this evidence except that you
of the men came out, the masters told have presneted before you to day, by the
them they must remain out for month; witnesses Cartledge and Griffin, that he
and that the masters would not take them was present at the conference. Is it
back again. Having gone out to get the necessary to come to the conclusion that
question of wages adjusted, and the mas- Railton was a guilty man, because he
ters having taken advantage of the turn- appeared to be there ? It is quite plain
out, and refused to receive the men back from a question which I asked Cartledge,
to their work, what illegality was there in and which heanswered very unequivocally,
his still remaining out, in conformity with that nothing illegal was contemplated by
the wishes of the masters ? He did no- the conference, and that they met there
thing more than what the law allowed for the purpose of reorganizing the
him-fairly to try to get an advance of Charist body. They had seen before
wages. You have been told that up to them this mass of confusion and, riot
that time, Durham * formed • one. of the. , that had taken place in the manufactur.
!7! . .
-, •

211
was thrown upon them, by the people
opposed to them, of giving a legal and
peaceable direction to that strike which
they never excited. Is it true that this strike
was originated by the Chartist body ?
Is it true that any act of theirs, was the
reason for the disunion that existed
between the work-people, and their employers ? Others may have gone of their
own accord and uttered sentiments which
may have been repudiated by the meeting, but it would be hard, if, because
persons who afterwards came forward, as
witnesses went to those meetings convened
for the purpose of regulating wages, and
uttered Chartist opinions, which in a
vast variety of cases were repudiatedit w ould be, a hard case to say that those
meetings were the result of a previous
I think the
Char tist organization.
Attorney - General himself will admit
that the Chartist body-acting as a body
-had never done any act, which could
be considered as giving the most remote
encouragement to the strike, till their
attention was called to it, by the state of
the town of Manchester, on the 16th of
August. But, did the delegates meet in
Scholefield's Chapel, for the purpose of
organizing a Chartist strike ? My friends
have shewn you by the evidence, that
they did no such thing. One of the
witnesses tells you-(Griffin,) that so
far back as the 8th of June, he himself
was invested with the office of secretary,
to carry out the celebration of the Hunt's
monument-to settle differences which
had sprung up between the Chartists
themselves, and, at the same time, to
investigate thoroughly the principles of
Chartism, so as to make the institution
perfectly legal. That was what Griffin
told you was the object of the Chartist
meeting. It was at a time, so far back
as the 8th of June, last year, that object
was contemplated. They deemed this a
solemn and proper occasion, to adjust
those differences existing among them as
to speculative opinions; and to combine
for a movement, which, however unanimously they might engage in it, would
be distinguished by nothing but the
greatest possible legality. Gentlemen,
you find that on the 9th of August, the
turn-outs marched to Manchester. How
did they come ? My learned' friend M-r.

come in military array ? Are they to be
regarded as coming in the array of an
army, merely because they marched four
or five a breast ? Why have we heard so
much of their cudgels and sticks ? What
deeds of bloodshed and devastation have
been traced to them ? Gentlemen, what
has been the conduct of those men ?
They came to the gates of Manchester;
the military are withdrawn; the magistrate, who had the best means of taking
cognizance of their guise and deportment, immediately determines that he
shall not obstruct them in their onward
course; but, looking on them as a meeting for a legal object, and recognizing
that object, he tells them not to disperse
but directs them to a meeting in Granbyt
row-fields. He tells them to do wha
every magistrate in this country had a
right to do-to meet and discuss any
speculative question either in the law
or constitution of the country. They
had a right to meet for such a purt
pose.
Up to that time no Chartist act was done. The trades' unions
had done something, and that has
been paraded here to-day, and through.
out the whole of this case, as if the acts
of the trades' unions had been the acts
of the Chartist body. The Chartist body
had no tangible connection whatever with
the strike, till they issued this Executive
Placard, which has been so much spoken
of. Gentlemen, we have heard several
placards read here, and they have been
so mixed up with one another, that you,
no doubt, have been led to infer that
every one of them has been referred to
the Chartist body. But none of them
is referrible to the Chartist body up to
the time this placard of the Executive
committee had been put forth-up to
that time there has been nothing to show
that the Chartist body had been acting
in combination with the persons out on
strike. The trades' unions had inculcated
" peace, law, and order ;" and the Char
tists recognised what they were pleases
to call the " courage" of their brother
tradesmen, who were, as they thought,
perhaps mistakenly, oppressed by their
masters in the matter of wages. "Peace,
and order," and " a fair day's wages for
a fair day's work,"-was that the act
of the Chartist body? No such thing.

212
this placard came out. And with regard
to that placard, I ha~e to say, standing
before ybu as the advocate of Dr.
M'iDouall-I have to impress it on your
minds, that the mere fact thathewasamember of the Chartist body-that fact alone,
coupled with the fact that the Executive
Committee had no great communication
with the Chartist body-will not be sufficient to connect him with that placard.
Up to that time nothing had occurred to
implicate the Chartist body, but, gentlemen, is there anything illegal in this
document? I shall not travel over the
ground already taken by Mr. Dundas.
He has analyzed in a most masterly manner every one ofthestatements in this document, and I shall only take leave to say,
that I quite concur with him, that every
idle statement that may assume the form
either of poetry or any matter of inflation, and which may be rather strong in
its mode of expression, is not therefore
to be taken as an instigation to violence and outrage. You must take the
whole case in all its parts, and say
whether he has used expressions figurative in character, or literal in application, so as not to have a definite
meaning. If you find that expressions
are used evidencing a peaceful intention,
so that it requires an application somewhat distorted to give them a meaning
like what the prosecutor put upon them,
then you are not to adopt his interpretation. I cannot do otherwise than use, in
reference to this matter, the language of
Chief Justice Tindal, when addressing
the Grand Jury, in Stafford, on a similar
point. He said :-" Gentlemen, another
description of offence, which will be probably submitted to your consideration, is,
exciting large masses of the people, by
means of seditious and inflammatory
speeches, to acts of violence and breaches
of the peace. If such charges are brought
forward, it will be left to your own sense
to distinguish between the honest declaration of a speaker's opinions, in a free
discussion on the subject on which he
speaks, always making full allowance for
the zeal of the speaker, though he may
somewhat exceed the just bounds of moderation." If any principle were better
reco gnised than another in this country,
it is the fair right of free and legal discussion. I believe there is nothing from the

prince to the peasant which is more than
another the distinctive character of Englishmen, than that that right does exist.
And if we were here to ascertain what
should be the test of itslegality or illegality,
we could not refer to anything more conclusive or germane to the feeling of the
law than that statement of the Chief
Justice. The depression under which the
mass of the people were labouring at the
time of this outbreak, was by no means
an idle or fanciful thing. I pray you,
gentlemen, do not for a moment suppose,
that at the time these people-misguided
though they be, were engaged in the
acts which they have committed-do
not suppose that the fault was all theirs,
and that th poverty under which they
laboured ws an imaginary one. We
have heafd, for the last two or three
years, testimony borne to the privations
which the people have endured with
such unexampled patience. We have,
even in the speech which her Majesty
herself delivered in the opening of parliament, a testimony to the manner
in which those sufferings were endured; and we have the fact, that this
country, which produces the greatest
quantity of manufactures, and which is
supplying the largest markets throughout
the habitable globe-that this country
has presented within the last three years,
as contrasted with former years, a greater
amount of poverty than ever the poor.
rates of this country bore testimony to.
Therefore it is not an exaggerated statement in this placard, that labour was
suspended, and misery was stalking
through the land. I won't, gentlemen,
weaken my friend's commentary on this
document by seeking to go though it.
Was it not the fair right of those persons
to strike for wages; and was it not also
the right of the Chartist body to give
that strike a fair and legal direction,
which was the principle running throughout all their transactions. These men
met on the 17th of August, and afterwards we find them doing every thing to
prevent tumult and disorder. They met
for the purpose, as Cartledge stated, of
reorganizing their own body, but recognizing the tumult around them, and fearing the people might break out into acts of
violence and outiage, unless they got a proper direction, they, as those persons in

213
whom the working people confided, immediately counselled them to keep the peace,
and endeavour to obtain the Charter. And
for what purpose ? It may be that the
Charter was not likely to be obtained,
and that, if realized, it would not be a
panacea for all those evils of which the
working classes complained. It might
be that even a national holyday would
not effect this object; but to indulge in
such a hope-to speculate on a probability
like that, and ask the pe. ple to keep
peace and order, that parliament might
be disposed to grant the Charter, which,
in the opinion of the working classes,
would keep the people from starving,
could not be called unlawful. Then,
gentlemen, was there any thing else
done by the Chartist body, besides that
document which they published on the
17th of August ? but let that be construed according to the rule laid down by
theLord ChiefJustice. Exerciseafair discretion, as my learned friend has told you.
Read the document as it ought to be read,
and do not distort it for any purpose.
It is true that I represent M'Douall, and
that, according to the evidence, I must
admit, that this document is brought
home to him as his production. Gentlemen, I will re-echo the sentiments of
Mr. Dundas, that, with the exception of
the last phrase-the appeal to the God
of justice and of battle, there is not a
single sentiment in that which can be
construed to be a sentiment of sedition.
i:ask you to exercise your common sense
upon that, and ask yourselves if it be
anythingmore than a sort of flourishing
termination, introducing that epithet
which We know ourselves is an epithet
applied in our Bible to the most High.
Gentlemen, although I here represent
M'Douall, I am bound to tell you, under
the direction of my Lord, that for his
own act M'Douall alone is responsible,
and whatever construction you may put
on that act, it is the party composing this
document that are to be answerable for
it. The fact of this document being
posted on the walls of various towns,
is no reason why it should be taken
as an element in the language of
those addressing the people, who
assembled in those localities. If that
were the case, it would be impossible fior
any man at a time of great excitement to

avoid being made responsible, fohe acts
of others who may be associated with
him in pursuance of a common and lawful purpose. It is not my intentism to
weaken the impression made upon y m
by the evidence of those parties. I have
only to call your attention to the evidensc
adduced against M' Douall. In looking
at that evidence, I find nothing except
fact alluded to by some persons who belonged to a public-house, who were calle
before you on Saturday last. I believae
those persons heard something of a treasonable and seditious character; by
which I thought it would be shewn that
he was leagued with the Chartist body
for sedition. Gentlemen, it appears that
Dr. M'Douall went to a house close to
Oldham-street, one of the largestthoroughfares in Manchester. He went into a
room called the snug, and, along with
others who were frequenters of the home,
he calls for refreshment, and asks for %
room to meet certain of his friends. At
three o'clock in the afternoon Mr. Feargus O'Connor arrives. Gentlemen, let
me ask you is there anything so wonderful, that a person like Mr. O'Connor,
who has taken so prominent a part iwe
public life, should have, when he goes into a town like Manchester, where there
are so many associated with him in political opinions-when he goes there im
the open day, and not skulking like a cowspirator- is it anything wonderful that
he should have many persons who wer
admirers of his doctrines, and to whom,
perhaps, he had been before familias,,
cxowding around him, and following hi
to this house ? But what was the conduct
of Mr. O'Connor on that occasion ? Was;
it the conduct of a person who had takem
a mob to follow him, to excite sedition
and disturbance ? In order to avoid any
thing of the kind, he first sends down
word to disperse the mob, and whenii the
mob is dispersed, he goes away by a back:
door to another house. Is that the act
of a person who wishes to create a tumult ? Was it not rather the act of a person who desired to prevent disturbance.
He meets Dr. M'Douall, and others of
the Chartist body, withthe view of putting,
off the intended meeting and procession,.
and other matters, for the purpose of preventing tumult. He is seen afterwards
in company with Mr. Scholcfield ani
P

214

other friends, discussing the turbulent appearance of the times. Was that wrong ?
Was it not rather commendable in the
Chartist body, that, when these facts
were brought to their notice, they should
do that which every well disposed subject was bound to do. Many others
would have gone with instead of opposing the popular movement; but they
gave a peaceable direction to that movement, and for doing this they are entitled
toyour commendation. Nothingis proved against Railton, except being present
at the meeting on the 17th of August.
Dr. M'Douall, it is true, put forth that
placard, but he is responsible for his own
acts. Railton lives in Manchester. Gentlemen, that is an observation in his favour. He is not shown to come from a
distance, or to be a delegate. But it is
not for me to weaken the effect of
the powerful statements made in the
commencement of the argument by Mr.
Dundas. If it were not for these parties
who confided their interests to me, I
should not have addressed you, but at
the same time I call on you to bear in
mind, for you will be called on by my
Lord, by and bye, so to do, what is the
individual interference charged on these
parties. It is true Durham was at a
meeting of turn-outs, but he is never
shewn to be at Manchester. It is true
that Railton is proved to have been present
at the conference of delegates. It is true
that M'Douall was in company with
Mr. O'Connor, and the evidence of two
apprentice boys shows that he is the

I
author of the Executive Address.
have to call your attention again and
again to the wording of that address, and
to remind you of the doctrine laid down
in Chief Justice Tindal's charge-that
if a man says no more than what is necessary to give a fair expression to his
opinions m politics, however wrong may
be the conclusions he seeks to draw from
them-if he does nothing but express
his own conscientious views, he is doing
what is the right of every Englishman.
And you have no right, because what he
says is uttered in a time of peculiar excitement, and because the language bears
a double aspect, one of which may be
unfavourable to him, to give it that unfavourable interpretation. But while regarding your duties as jurymen, you are
also to afford the best protection to that
liberty which you are all so interested in
preserving.
Mr. BAINES then handed in some
placards issued by the Hunt's monument
committee.
Mr. O'CONNOR: - I wish before
you adjourn, to ask your Lordship
whether, or no, you have a note of the
exact time at which the Attorney-General
entered his Nolle prosequi ?
The JUDGE :-I am not sure.
The JUDGE then read his note of
the entry of the NVolle prosequi, after
which he adjourned the trial till the following day.
The Court adjourned at half-past six
o'clock.

END OF FIFTH DAY'S TRIAL.

TRIAL OF FEARGUS

O'CONNOR, ESQ.,

AND OTHERS.

SIXTH

DAY,

Tuesday, Miarch 7th, 1843.

Mr. BARON ROLFE took his seat on the bench this morning at nine o'clock.
As it was known that several of the defenda.its were to address the Court and Jury,
the attendance of spectators was unusually large. All the available space about the
bench was occupied by ladies of the highest respectability in Lancaster and its immediate neighbourhood; every spot throughout the Court had its attentive occupant,
and the effect produced by the unpremeditated eloquence of those uneducated, but
talented men, who conducted their own defence, was powerful in the extreme. It
would, perhaps, be invidious to point particular attention to the address of any individual where all acquitted themselves so well; but the speech of Harney will be
read with peculiar interest, and fully justifies the position which be occupied as the
first speaker. The artless and unvarnished statement of Pilling, told with thrilling
effect upon all who heard it. Not only the ladies, but the Jury, the Judge, and
even theAttorney-General himself, were affected to tears by the truthful and touching
address of this factory operative. Indeed, the Attorney-General was so overpowered
by the picture drawn by Pilling, of the distress which existed among the workingclasses previous to the turn-out, and the heartless cruelty which they experienced at
the hands of the master-manufacturers, that he was obliged to leave the Court. The
speeches of the other defendants will amply repay perusal. They were heard with
delight and satisfaction; and they fully proved that the man who is his own counsellor has not always a fool for his client. Before we enter on the proceedings of
this day, we will place before our readers an abstract of the indictment, which is
essentially necessary to a clear understanding of what follows.
ABSTRACT OF THE INDICTMENT AGAINST FEARGUS O'CONNOR, ESQ.,
AND OTHERS.
"The first count charges that the defendants, to create alarm, discontent, and confusion, with
with divers other evil-disposed persons unknown, intent thereby unlawfully to effect and bring
between the 1st of August and the 1st of October about a change in the laws and constitution of
last, unlawfully did conspire, confederate, and this realm."
agree, by causing to be brought together divers
"The second count charges the defendants with
unlawful, tumultuous, and riotous assemblies of wilfully conspiring, by force and violence, and
seditious and evil-disposed persons, and by forc- by creating alarm and discontent, tumult and
ing and compelling divers other persons, and by confusion, unlawfully to effect and bring about a
forcing and compelling divers of her Majesty's change in the laws."
peaceable subjects, being then employed in their
" The third count charges the defendants with
respective trades, to desist and depart from their having conspired with others to aid, abet, assist,
work, and by divers seditious and inflammatory comfort, support, and encourage the said evilspeeches, libels, placards, and other publications, I disposed persons to continue and persist in the

216
said unlawful assemblies, threats, intimidation,
and violence, with intent thereby to cause terror and alarm in the minds of the peaceable sub.
jects of the realm, by means of such terror and
alarm to cause and procure certain great changes
to be made in the constitution of this realm."
'" The fourth count charges the said prisoners,
on the 1st day of August, in the year aforesaid,
and on divers other days and times between
that day and the 1st of October, in the year
aforesaid, and at divers places, divers evil-disposed persons unlawfully and tumultuously assembled together, and by violence, threats, and
intimidation to divers other persons, being then
peaceable subjects of this realm, forced the said
last-mentioned subjects to leave their occupations and employments, and thereby impeded
and stopped the labour employed in the lawful
and peaceable carrying on, by divers large numbers of the subjects of this realm, of certain
trades, manufactures, and business, and thereby
caused great confusion, terror. and alarm m the
minds of the peaceable sub:ects of this realm,
and that afterwards on the 1st of August,
in the year aforesaid, and on divers other
days and times, between that day and the
8th of October, in the year aforesaid, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, the said
defendants, together with divers other evildisposed persons, to the jurors aforesaid as yet
unknown, did unlawfully abet, aid, assist, comfort, support, and encourage the said evildisposed persons in this count first mentioned,
to continue and persist in the said unlawful
assemblages, threats, intimidations, and violence,
in the said impeding and stopping of the labour
employed in the said trades, manufactures, and
businesses, with intent thereby to cause terror
and alarm in the minds of the peaceable subjects
of this realm, and by means of such terror and
alarm violently and unlawfully to cause and
procure certain great changes to be made in the
constitution of this realm as by law established,
against the peace of our Lady the Queen, her
trown and dignity."
"The fifth count charges that the defendants,
together with divers other evil disposed persons,
to the jurors aforesaid as yet unknown; afterwards, to wit, on the 1st of August, in the year
aforesaid, and on divers other days, between that
day and the 1st of October, in the year aforesaid,
together with divers other evil-disposed persons,
to the jurors as yet unknown, unlawfully did endeavour to excite her Majesty's liege subjects to
lisaffetion and hatred of her laws, and unlawfully

did endeavour to persuade and encourage the said
liege subjects to unite, confederate, and agree to
leave their several and resnective employments.
and to uroduce a cessation of labour throughout
a large portion of this realm, with intent, and n
order, by so doing, to bring about and produce a
change in the laws and constitution of the realm,
and against the peace of our said Lady the Queen,
her crown and dignity."
" The sixth count charges the defendants for
unlawfully conspiring to cause divers persons to
assemble and meet together, and by threats and
violence unlawfully to force, and endeavour to
force, divers of Her Majesty's peaceable subjects
to depart from their employment and work, against
the peace of the queen, &c.
Seventh, for unlawfilly inciting and stirring
up, and endeavouring to incite and stir up, great
numbers of Her Majesty's liege subjects, with
force of arms, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously, to assemble together, and by threats,
violence, and intimidation, unlawfully to force
and endeavour to force divers of Her Majesty'5
subjects to depart from their hiring and work.

" Eighth, that the defendants and divers others
did unlawfully meet and assemble together, with
clubs, sticks, and other offensive weapons, to dis-

turb the tranquillity, peace, and good order of
this realm, and in contempt of her Majesty the
Queen, and against her peace, her crown, and
dignity."
" Ninth, (the common count for riot) that the

defendants, and others unknown, did unlawfully,
riotously, and tumultuously assemble and continue together for a long space of time, to wit for
six hours or more, to the great terror of her

Majesty's lieges; then and there being in contempt of the Queen and her laws, and against
the peace of the Queen, her crown, and dignity."

We have given the fourth and fifth
counts at full length, because they are
the most important, as will be seen from

the subsequent proceedings, particularly
the summing up.

Immediately after his Lordship had
taken his seat,

Mr. ATHERTON rose and said, I
would take this opportunity, my Lord, of
asking the Attorney-General, whether he
has come to the conclusion of abandoning any of the counts in the indictment.

The ATTORNEY -GENERAL:My Lord, I do not mean to proceed upon
the two last counts, but on looking at the
sixth and seventh, it appears to me necessary to retain them. I think them ex-

tremely important with reference to some

217
of the convictions which have previously
taken place-I mean at Chester and
Liverpool. In reality they have nothing
whatever to do with riot.
The JUDGE:-Very well.
Mr. ATHERTON:-May it please
your Lordship; gentlemen of the jury, I
have the honour of appearing before you
on behalf of the defendants James and
William Stephenson, and although my
learned friend who preceded me occupied ground common to the interests of
the clients entrusted to my care, with
those of the other defendants, and thus
relieved me of a considerable portion of
my labour, still you will find that there
is some distinction between the case of
my clients, and that of some of the other
defendants; therefore it will be necessary
for me to occupy some part of your time.
And well content will I be, and abundantly satisfied Will my clients have reason to feel themselves, should they meet
at your hands with the same degree
of attention which you have hitherto
given to the case. In the able and temperate address with which Her Majesty's
Attorney-General ushered in this case(and I call it an important address)-he
called your attention to events of an appalling and extraordinary character which
occurred in Manchester during the recent disturbances. It was shown that at
that time the busy hum of machinery in
that hive of industry was stilled, all labour was suspended, and a silence equally
immense and universal pervaded that and
the neighbouring districts. This state of
things is described with no less truth and
vividness in the Executive Address. It
has been shown to you, that bands of
persons were pervading the country, and
though little actual violence occurred,
doubtless by the terror of their presence
causing a cessation of labour. You have
heard of a few instances in which collisions took place between the people and
the constituted authorities, and, I regret
to say, that the events out of which this
enquiry arose did not pass over without
some bloodshed. You have heard that
in one town-the town of Preston-Englishmen fell by the arms of British soldiers in the shadow of their own houses,
in the presence of their wives, their children and their friends. Can an enquiry
of this kind be at all exaggerated in its

importance ? You will agree with me
that it is an important enquiry, and I am
sure you will give it all the consideration that its importance demands, and all
the sympathy which the disastrous situation in which my clients are placed especially claims at your hands. There is one
circumstance attached to this case, indicative of great importance-a circumstance which I cannot advert to without
gratification, and for which I have to
thank the Attorney-General. I have the
honour of addressing a special jury of
this great and intelligent country; and
though special jurors, you know, do not
belong to what we term-(to use the
words which have been too familiar in the
course of this investigation)- though
they do not belong to the class to which
the defendants belong - though you
are the possessors of capital-the owners
of accumulated property, whose worth
arises from their exertions, still it is
hardly a compliment to say that the case
of these men withoutcapital,and depending
on their labour for subsistence, will receive
at your hands as attentive a consideration
of their case, as if their own confederates
were sitting on the jury. When I consider the magnitude and complexity of
this case, and the number of its details
from the shape in which it was presented
to you, I cannot but congratulate my'
clients and myself that we have in that'
box that intelligence, and those abilities
for patient investigation for which your
ordinary pursuits so eminently qualify
you. Gentlemen, on behalf of my clients
I thank the crown-I thank the prose.ution--for this particular exercise of the
prerogative. If ever there was a case l
which it became a jury who had to try
the facts of the case to be wary before
they pronounced a verdict of guilty on
the accused, it is the present. I would
not weary you with a thrice told tale-I
would not weary you by adverting to
circumstances to which your attention
has been already directed, but there is one
point of such great moment that it appears to me you cannot too carefully consider it. You have been told of the
extraordinary nature of this indictment.
You have fifty-nine people put into one
indictment, and charged substantially
with one offence. I do not say that that
of itself is hardship to the defendants,

218
Int I say it is a. circumstance which
ought to make you the more careful to
see that every individual against whom
you shall find it your duty to prouounce
a verdict of guilty (supposing you shall
find it your duty to do so at all) is clearly,
and satisfactorily connected with the crime
which the Executive charges upon him.
Gentlemen, you know that, in ordinary
cases, a man charged with a specific offence is answerable for his own acts and
words alone; or if his responsibility is
extended he is held responsible only for
the language of others spoken in his
presence, and no disclaimer uttered on
his part.. -In that case he is held, in
law, to participate in such language. But
what have we here ? Fifty-nine people of
different occupations-living in different
places-shown to have acted in different
places-remote from each other-without
personal communication-many of whom
never saw each other-all brought together in this indictment, which charges
them with a conspiracy. You, gentlemen, cannot have failed to perceive that,
from time to time, evidence was given of
words and transactions oit of the hearing
-far out of the sight of those against
Whom the proof was offered. You will
recollect, gentlemen, that an exception
was taken to such evidence by those to
whom the defence of those charged in
the indictment was entrusted, and you
will recollect that my Lord overruled
the objection, and rightly, deciding that
the admissibility of the evidence arose
from the nature of this charge. For the
charge is such, gentlemen, that a man remote from the scene of action-even slumbering on his bed, may be made responsible for the sentiments and acts of a man
whom he never saw, or whose sentiments
he never heard. Mr. Baines spoke the
truth, and expressed the truth aptly, when
he designated the indictment as a monstrous indictment; I stand not here, on
behalf of my clients, to offer puling complaints on any subject, but I say the nature of the charge as preferred by the government is such as to call on you to exorcise the most extraordinary vigilancevigilance as uncommon,ifI may so speak,
as the form of the indictment is unusual
-before you determine that any particular defendant is guilty of the charge
against him. Do I need to add a word
as to the necessity of caution in this

proceeding ? If I did, I would advert
to the circumstance that this is a government prosecution.
My clients, and
the majority of the defendants, are poor
men, without great means of defence
-without the means of scouring the
country for intelligence and witnesses
to contradict the evidence adduced on
behalf of the prosecution. The defendants are opposed by the government of
the country; and you will have observed
-and I have observed it with gratification-that no expense has been sparedthat great pains have been taken to procure evidence against the defendants.
The country has been scoured for that
purpose, from one extremity to the other,
and you have presented to you a complete picture of the unfortunate state in
which a great part of this county, and
some of the adjoining counties, were placed
in August last. If ever there was a time
more than another when a jury could
prove themselves valuable to an Englishman it is the present. If ever there was
a time when an Englishman put upon
his trial had a right to look more particularly with confidence to the intelligent attention, and the shielding office of the
jury than on any other occasion, it is the
.present, in which the parties charged at
the bar are weak subjects, and the prosecutor the Crown, represented by the government, is strong and powerful. Having made these observations, I will now
advert to some of the evidence laid
before you.
I will begin by calling
attention to a few facts about which there
can be no dispute-which I will call facts
proved in the prosecution. These facts
are of such a nature that I am called upon to dwell shortly on them, on behalf of
my clients. Now, gentlemen, the first
fact, which I cannot but consider estab'
lished beyond dispute, is this, that the
unfortunate strike-I call it unfortunatenot that it was wicked in its conception,
but that in some of its results it was deplorable-this strike did not originate
with the Chartists. It was said recently,
by a high legal authority, that he
could take no judicial cognizance of
a Chartist; but it became necessary,
from the nature of this proceeding, that
a Chartist should be defined to you, and
that you should be made to know, by
legal evidence, what Chartism is. I think
it has been fully shown to you that the

219
Chartists are seeking some political
change. It is equally manifest that the
strike did not originate with them. The
strike originated, so far as its origin is
developed, (and I think we may safely
assume this to be the case,) with the
workmen who were dissatisfied with the
wages which they received from their
employers. Some of the witnesses called
before you, who belonged to that class
of masters called manufacturers, did not
seem ready to admit that wages were at
a very low ebb. But I may put it to
your klnowledge and experience-indeed
I may offer it as a matter of notoriety-that wages, at all events, were so low in
the eyes of the workmen as to make them
dissatisfied. .But whether they were receiving, or not, an adequate remuneration
for their labour, was a questien which
they had a right to deliberate uponthey had a right to adopt such views
as they thought proper, and settle the
matter by the means to which they had
recourse, namely, the strike. You have
heard it stated, over and over again, that
there was nothing illegal in a strike on
the part of the workmen. It is satisfactory to me, and it must be so to you,
also, to know that this strike did not
originate from any political motives, and
cannot be traced to the Chartists. Because, if it could be shown that persons
professing to have in view a political
motive, sought to obtain that object by
inducing a large body of men to cease
from labour, that would be a most hazardous and imprudent experiment. It
is, however, unquestionably proved that
this strike did not originate with the
Chartists, but was the act of the workmen
themselves. The indictment charges, that
the defendants did certainly act, in
themselves, illegally, for the purpose of
bringing about a change in the law ;
and it was manifest, from the address of
the Attorney-General at the commencement, and has been abundantly proved
in the progress of this case, that the
change in the law, referred to in the indictment, is that change called the People's Charter. So thait you have many
of these defendants charged with certain
acts done by them, with the intention
of bringing about a specific change for
the purpose of making the People's
Charter the law of the land. Now, it

has been said, and said with truth, that
you are not empanelled to try the reasonableness, fanaticism, or impropriety
of those opinions entertained by Chartists. Whether they are reasonable, or
irrational, is not the question submitted
to your consideration; but knowing how
difficult it is for the most practised and
astute mind, while considering such questions, to divest themselves of prejudice, I
think it is of importance that you should
bear in mind what that change really is,
which the body of men called Chartists
seek. The six propositions, in which are
embodied the doctrines of the people calling themselves Chartists,have been proved
to you-they are, universal suffrage-vote
by ballot-annual parliaments-electoral
districts-no property qualification for
members-and payment of members.
Now, gentlemen, there is nothing monstrous, nothing alarming in these doctrines; there is nothing in them which a
man of education, or a man of property,
a man of stake in the country might not
patiently and deliberately look in the
face, and which may. not be admitted
amongst the most orderly and rational
Englishmen as fair matter for debate.
Had it come out in the course of this
investigation, that the doctrines of the
Charter would lead in their probable and
necessary results to the confiscation of
property-the destruction of educationor the endangering of life, or any outrageous ends of this description, I cannot
but feel that my clients, being identified
with such opinions, might, in the minds
of reasonable men, to a certain extent, be
injured.
But it has been shewirn that
the opinions these men entertained are
reasonable opinions. I need not remind
you, from the knowledge you possess of
recent political events, that there is not a
single proposition in the Charter that has
not met with defenders amongst men the
highest in rank, the most wealthy, men
of the greatest mental cultivation and of
the most powerful influence among their
fellows. Take the three cardinal points
of the Charter-annual parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot. Were
not -these propositions maintained by men
such as I have described, and from year
to year presented to a large and intelligent constituency-as large and intelligent a constituency as any in this country

220
--- mean the constituency of the City of you in his opening address-I mean the
'estminster-were not these the propo- comparative absence of outrage and vio:sitions which Sir Francis Burdett and lence, during a time of great excitement,
Sir John Hobhouse, from year to year, and emergencies of the most appalling
brought before their constituencies ? character. I cannot in this respect go
If these opinions were promulgated by beyond what was stated by the Attorney!such men, and before such constituencies, General-I could not if I were inclined
.are they to be held as in themselves put it half so forcibly, and, therefore, I
perilous when such men as the defendants conclude my observations on this part of
anaintain and propound them ? The the case, by using his words :-" There
allot is no beggarly Jack Cade doc- can be no doubt, that, if any attempt of
t.ine, taken up only by those who had no this sort was to be again made, it perhaps
property. The man who above all others could not be made with more respect for
distinguished himself on that question is property and for life than what it generally
mo sans culotte, but one of the prince- did obtain, even where violence was used.
anerchants of Lombard-street, I mean I should, gentlemen, bear willing testiMVr. Grote. I need hardly refer to a mony to the forbearance and moderation
mnoble lord, possessing the highest dignity that frequently appeared, even in the
in the profession to which we belong-a midst of the lawless acts that were compeer in the upper senate house-I mean mitted. The boldest defiance of the law
Lord Brougham,-a man whom we would was accompanied by a respect for life and
not suspect of taking up any crude or property." Gentlemen, if you bear in
preposterous doctrine in politics,-he is mind the immense territory over which
in favour of the ballot. I may also refer those disturbances extended and the great
.to the name of a great jurist and philo- numbers of people who assembled from
sopher, who spent a long life in the inves- time to time-if you take all these circumligation of political topics-Jeremy Ben- stances into consideration, you cannot
tham-I may safely say, that from the :fail to be surprised, and to congratulate
'knowledge I possess of the works of that yourselves asEnglishmen,onthe comparaiana, that there is not a single point in tively trivial violence offered to life and
This much maligned Charter which he did property. Gentlemen, there is another cirnaot defend and enforce, in the works cumstance whichI alsothink is alsobeyond
which he has left to posterity. It is not dispute, and which materially affects one
maecessary that I should exhaust the recent classofdefendants,Imean that class called
history of political men and parties in conferencedelegates; forImay aswelltake
this country, I have only adverted to these occasion now-indeed it is incumbent on
things for the purpose of shewing, what me-(not so much on the learned gentleyour own experience and knowledge will man who preceded me)-to call attenionfirm, that there is not a single propo- tion to two classes of individuals ;-the
sition in the Charter which is not ap- conference delegates who assembled in
proved of by men whose researches and Manchester , and the persons who were
,xperience entitle their opinions to the called turn-outs, two of whom I represent.
greatest weight4 and whose motives are, I mean by " turn-outs" those who were
as far as possible, removed from suspicion. connected with the movement which
Gentlemen, though you are not met here preceded the meetings in Manchester.
to consider the right or the wrong of With respect to the former class of dethese opinions, yet it is consolatory to fendants, who are all bQund up together,
know, that these are the doctrines of though I represent, specially, the turnthe Charter; and that they are such outs, yet my clients are interested in the
doctrines that the mooting of them acquittal of all the parties charged in the
may be harmless, and perfectly con- acts of the conference. The meeting at
sistent with the peace, law, order, and Manchester was projected long before the
prosperity of these realms.
There is strike. I am aware that it may be replied
znother thing to which I have still to this, "True, this meeting was acreater pleasure to advert, and which I cidental, and it may be an accident which
.must do the Attorney-General the justice brought them together, but, being present
%o say that he brought prominently before at the time they took advantage of the

221
circumstance of the strike, and abused
it." But at all events (for I defy the
Attorney-General to say that he has demonstrated the guilt of any one individual
on this indictment) in considering the
question propounded, of conspiracy, or
no conspiracy, it is certainly of the greatest
moment that you should bear in mind,
that that meeting called a conclave-that
meeting at which, it is alleged, parties
conspired, and to which the acts in furtherance of the conspiracy is traced-it
is of the greatest importance for you to
consider that that meeting was not called
to further the strike, but was an accident-a coincidence merely. The only
remaining circumstance which, it appears to me, has been proved beyond
dispute, and to which it is necessary to
call your attention before I come to the
charge, is this:-that whatever may have
been the designs of the conference (and
for aught that appears in evidence, I say
they were innocent, and even laudable)
and whatever may have been the tendency of this publication [the Executive
placard] it is gratifying to know, that
they were attended with no evil result.
It has been proved to you that, on some
days preceding the 17th of August, violence had taken place. That had been
elicited in the course of-e examination
of some of the early litnesses. Whether it was an after-thought on the part
of those engaged in the prosecution, or
whether it was justified by the cross-examination, it is not for me to say; but,
certainly, towards the close of the case,
witnesses were called from different localities to prove, that violence had taken
place in various parts of the country
after the 17th of August. Gentlemen,
if isolated cases of outrage have been
proved to exist in different parts of the
country subsequent to that period, you,
surely, will not allow your minds to be
influenced by facts of that description.
You will consider whether it was prevalent at a particular period; and you will
recollect that the delegates. met for an
object alien to the strike. You will perceive that the general state of things
after the publication of this address, was
pacific; and when you come to look at
the documents on which this charge of
conspiracy is found to be supported, you
will find that their tendency was pacific.

So that the delegates ought to be considered as having been engaged in a laudable undertaking, and as having acted
the part of peace-makers, than otherwise.
I now come to the charge contained in
this extraordinary indictment, and I
should have felt myself-and we should
have all felt qurselves-relieved from painful embarrassments if the crown, whatever may be the strict meaning of the
law, had taken advantage of the suggestion of my Lord, (which would not require the exercise of very extraordinary
magnanimity) and confined the charge
to one count. That, however, is not the
case, and you have now for your consideration some six or seven counts, and to
these I will briefly call your attention.
You will perceive that the first four
counts alone, (I think I may safely say
so) are those upon which it will be
sought to fix the defendants-especially
the conference of delegates-these are
the only political counts on the face of
the record. In each of these four counts
certain acts are charged, but in each
count it is also stated that the acts
imputed were done to bring about a
change in th laws of the realm. The
first count charges that the defendants,
with divers other evil-disposed persons unknown, between the 1st of August and
the Ist of Octobei last, unlawfully did
conspire, confederate, and agree, by
causing to be brought together divers unlawful, tumultuous, and riotous assemblies of seditious and evil-disposed persons, and by forcing and compelling
divers other persons, and by forcing and
compelling divers of her majesty's peaceable subjects, being then employed in
their respective trades, to desist and depart from their work, and by divers seditious and inflammatory speeches, libels,
placards, and other publications, to create
alarm, discontent, and confusion, with
intent thereby unlawfully to effect and
bring about a change in the laws and
constitution of this realm. The second
count recites truly that great alarm existed
in the country, and charges the defendants
with wilfully conspiring, by force and
violence, and by creating alarm and discontent, tumult and confusion, unlawfully
to effect and bring about a change in the
laws. The third count states the offence,
and then charges the defendants with

222
having conspired with others to aid, abet,
assist, comfort, support, and ' encourage
the said evil-disposed persons to continue
and persist in the said unlawful assemblies, threats, intimidation, and violence,
with intent thereby to cause terror and
alarm in the minds of the peaceable subjects of the realm, by means of such
terror and alarm to cause and procure
certain great changes to be made in the
constitution of this realm. The fourth
count is substantially the same as the
third. Now, Gentlemen, consider for a
moment these counts, and you will find
that the defendants are charged with an
intention ultimately to make the acts
which they did subservient to the
bringing about a change in the laws,
and you know what that change is.
Each of the first four counts is levelled
against the Chartists. Each of these
(coupling the counts with the evidence)
charges certain persons with an attempt to
make, by force, Chartist doctrines the laws
of the land. I must call your attention
particularly to this point; that, in each
of the counts force-force, direct or indirect force-is charged upon the defendants. It is not that they sought, by
some means or other to bring about a
change, for that would undoubtedly be
absurd on the face of it-a man has a
right to maintain the views expressed in
the charter, and by all lawful means to
make these the law. In order to make
this a crime on the face of the indictment,
it was necessary to allege some unlawful
act on their part, by which they sought
this legitimate end. That act is force.
You will observe it is alleged that they
" conspired by unlawful assemblies, and
by compelling a cessation of labour," to
make the charter the law of the land.
The second count says they conspired
by " force and alarm" to bring about a
change in the law; the third count, which
is a very prominent one, and on which
the prosecution would mainly rely' as affecting the conference of delegates, states
the existence of tumults and violence, and
the stopping of works, and charges the
defendants with a conspiracy to abetthose
guilty of tumults in order to bring about
such a change as will make the Charter
the law of the land. Having stated that
a cessation from work having been caused
by the application of force and violence,

the count goes on to charge the defen
dants with a conspiracy to abet that force
and violence, and so to continue the cornpulsory, and therefore illegal, cessation of
labour. The fourth count is substantially
the same as the third, only that instead of
chargiug that the defendants conspired
to abet those guilty of violently causing
others to cease from work, it simply
charges that the defendants abetted those
persons so engaged to continue and persist in such violent conduct, in order to
effect certain changes in the constitution.
Now, gentlemen, I beg of you to bear
this in mind with respect to the charge
in these four counts,-which I may call
the political charge in the indictmentin each of these counts the defendants
are charged directly or indirectly with
force, and it will not be sufficient for you
to be satisfied of what I may consider
to be a fact, that the persons, who are
brought before you as the conference of
delegates, professed Chartist doctrines,
and having found a cessation of labour,
they thought proper to counsel the continuance of that cessation from labour
until the Charter became the law of the
land-it is not thrown upon you to enquire whether that was legal or notprobably you will consider that that was
done; but, although you may be of
was done by the conopinion that
ference of dele es, your conviction of
that fact is not sufficient (and I say it
under the correction of my Lord) to warrant you in finding the conference of delegates guilty of these four counts. You
must be satisfied that these men, knowing
of the existence of a forcible and cornpulsory cessation from labour, aid in
continuing that forcible compulsion and
cessation, before you find a verdict of
guilty on any one of these four counts.
I will not weary you by going over the
Executive Address, (the alleged authors
of which, by the way, are in no way connected with the conference of delegates,)
or the Conference Address. This has
already been commented upon in a manner far more able than it would be in my
power to do; but I do say this,-and I
say it with respect to the Conference
Address, which you will recollect appeared in the Northern Star, and which
has been already read to you,-I do say,
that, looking at that Address, and I par-

223
ticularly call. your attention to itnow,--- at one time or another, being produced.
it- is impossible for you, sitting there, as A private letter addressed to London or
the Attorney-General said, to find only elsewhere cannot explain a particular
those guilty of whose guilt you can have act done by a party on the same day.
no reasonable doubt; I say it is impos- If my learned friend wishes to go beyond
sible for you, thus deliberating, to say the general statement which I have made
thatthat address counselled such a forcible respecting Mr. O'Connor's writings in the
continuance of the strike, as I contend Star, then, although I would give every
before you and my Lord these counts indulgence, and as far as is consistent
charge. And upon this part of the case with my duty allow everything to go
I shall seek-whether the Attorney- before the jury, I must object to any
General shall object to my doing so or particular acts or expressions at whatever
not I cannot tell-I shall seek to read, in time done being laid before the jury.
Mr. ATHERTON :-My Lord, I ask
aid of the construction which I have presented to you in reference to the Con- to read, in this part of the case, an article
ference Address, which appeared in the from the Northern Star of the date which
Northern Star, some extracts from arti- has been put in.
cles which appeared in the same publiThe ATTORNEY - GENERAL:cation for the purpose of disproving the From the Northern Star of the 20th of
violent tendency of the particular address August ?
Mr. ATHERTON:-Yes.
read to you.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :The JUDGE :-0 ! that is from the
same paper put in by the Attorney-GeYou mean from the Northern Star ?
Mr. ATHERTON :-Yes.
neral. I thought it was from the Morning
Star.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL:The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:My Lord, I cannot object to any general
evidence of the character of the defendant Some doubt may be raised as to whether
who is on his trial for a particular offence, that can be done.
The JUDGE :-As a rule of law it
the tendency of which evidence is to
show that he generally bore a different cannot necessarily be laid down, but the
character. The jury may take that into question is, whether, taking the whole totheir consideration in the event of finding gether, it is not quite of a different chait necessary to look at his character. My racter.
Lord, I am extremely happy that my
Mr. ATHERTON: -I
understand
learned friend has called attention to it, the Attorney-General relieves me from
but I must object to particular publica- the necessity of contending for one point.
tions of a particular kind being given in Ie admits that the general tone of the
evidence. I myself in the opening en- paper up to a certain period was pacific.
deavoured to do justice to Mr. O'Con- I propose now to read an extract from
nor's general character. I do not know the very paper containing the address
that my learned friend appears for him, proved on the part of the prosecution.
but I endeavoured to do justice to him, for That surely cannot be objected to.
I would not suppress anything favourable
The JUDGE:-I wish to guard myto any defendant. I stated that up to a self against making any concession when
certain period-the 20th of August, the I say it is very reasonable that the artitendency of Mr. O'Connor's writings in cle should be admitted; but it does not
tle Northern Star was, I believed, op- follow that because a certain article is in
posed to the course charged in that in- the same paper, it necessarily qualifies
dictment; and I have permitted the wit- that which the prosecution charges as inness who was a reporter for that paper, flammatory. I think you have a right to
to give in evidence that the object and read the whole to show what the meaning of
scope of the writings in the Northern that article was. I do not object to your
Star, up to the 20th of August last, were reading anything from that paper.
opposed to any violation of the peace.
Mr. ATHERTON:- Gentlemen of
But I must object-your Lordship will the jury, it will be in your recollection
say whether correctly or not in point of that the conference of delegates were not
law-to any specific publication, whether fixed with any direct personal participa-

224
tion in those proceedings. It was not attainment by the trades of Manchester, was
contended that they were part of the registered three years ago. That opinion has

tumultuous assemblies, or part of the
people who stormed the workhouse at
Stockport, or turned out the hands at
Ashton, Hyde, or elsewhere; but it was
said that these things having been done,
the conference delegates met at Manchester, and by their publications aided
and abetted others oho were taking an
and betted others who were taking an
active part in these outrages. It was not
they
charged on these delegates that they did
charged these delegates that
on
did
this, by speeches, in Manchester and
elsewhere ; but certain placards and publications emanating, or supposed to emanate, from those delegates were brought
before you, and on the tendency of those
documents the crown relied for the purpose of fixing the defendants in question.
Now, gentlemen, it is most material that
ou should consider what your attention
as been more than once called to, namely,
the construction of the paper put in. If,
looking carefully and dispassionately at
these documents, and considering the
time and nature of this prosecution,
you find it-without any reasonable doubt
proved to your minds that they have the
tendency ascribed to them by the prosecution, then find such of the defendants
as you can connect with them guilty;
but if the construction of these documents
be doubtful, then, according to the general rule, give the defendants the benefit
of that doubt. If I can show to you that
the .NorthernStar, which I think we may
take as the Chartist organ, had, up to the
period in which this address appeared,
counselled peace, law, and order, then you
will, it appears to me. be doing injustice
to the defendants if you put so harsh a
construction on the address as the prose.
cution sought to lead you to. Now, gentlemen, with that view, I shall proceed
to read an extract from the paper in
which the conference address appeared.
I say, that conference address may have
counselled the continuance of the strikeit may have counselled the people out of

undergone no change. A cessation from labour
to be effectual to the carrying of any political object, must be national and simultaneous; it cannot then fail to be successful, because it indicates
the nation's will, against which, in its full
strength, whether positively, or thus negatively
manifested, no power can stand; but a mere
sectional display of this most decisive of all the
forms of moral force, like a mere sectional display of p
play of physical resistance, is sure to be overpowered by the strength of faction, consisting in
its immense wealth and its organized physical
resources."
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:Let us see whether this is the paper of
the 20th of August.
The JUDGE :-What part of the paper is it in.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL
Your Lordship has a copy of the paper.
The JUDGE :--How does it begin.
Mr. ATHERTON:-This, my Lord,
seems to begin in the middle.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:It was, my Lord, because it began in the
middle that I wanted to see what went before it.
The JUDGE.-Just see how it begins.
Mr. ATHERTON -" Our opinion
on the means now used".-[The learned
Judge having occupied several minutes
looking for the beginning of the articlb
without being able to find it]
Mr. ATHERTON said :-Then, my
Lord, I won't delay the court.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I
dare say, my Lord, what has just been
suggested to me is true ;-that it appeared
in a second edition of the 20th, being a
reprint of something that appeared in the
paper of the 13th.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I can set the
Attorney-General right. It appeared in
the third edition of the 13th, and th
first of the 20th, and therefore we cannot find it.

The JUDGE:-It is the third edition
work, to remain out of work, but it did
not counsel that which the indictment I have got.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:charges-violent or tumultuous assemblies for the purpose of obtaining a My Lord, this appears to be the first
change in the laws and constitution. I edition which I have in my hand.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Here it is, Mr.
shall now read the extract to which I
headed-" From our
have alluded :-Attorney-General,
'

Our opinion on the means now used for its third edition of last week."

225
The JUDGE :-What page is it ?
The

ATTORNEY-GENERA[i:-

calmness of a manly contempt, the offspring of
a lofty purpose not to be turned aside."

This is on page eight, fifth column, at
the bottom.-" From our third edition
of last week-Further progress. Northein Star office, Saturday morning, two
o'clock."
The JUDGE :-It is not in the third
edition, then.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-It is not, my
Lord. It is in the third edition of the
13th, and the first edition of the 20th.
The ATTORNEYY- GFNERAL :Although it is not in the paper before
your Lordship, as it is in that I have in
my hand, my learned friend may read
it to you.
Mr. ATHERTON:-In the first paper published after the 16th of August,
the day on which the alleged conspiracy took place, you have the following
expressions :-Adverting to the strike,
and the necessity for its being general,
in order that it might be available for
political ends, the writer proceeds :-

Now, gentlemen, when you consider that,
as against a great section of those defendants, their participation in the outrage,
violence, and terror, of the existence of
which we have the most abundant and
indubitable proof, is founded on the publication of that address which is specially
the act of the conference; and when you
consider that that address is capable of
two constructions-for if it is capable of
the construction that it contains violence,
at all events it is capable of another construction; and when you come to scan
thAvords of men, who, being absent from
the scene of the outrages, may have in
some parts spoken rather strongly, you
will find pleasure in referring to other
parts, in which peace is inculcated; and
from these parts you will gain light which
will guide you to a right interpretation
of those parts to which your attention is
specially directed, and then you will be
clear in your conviction that the case for
S"If then the strike is to be a Chartist strike, the crown is not made out. I shall not
it must become universal: not merely Manches- go over the ground so ably occupied by
ter, but every town in England, Wales, and
Scotland, must at once-as one man and with one
voice-declare the purpose of the people to be
free; and such a declaration will be to those
whom it concerns the fiat of omnipotence. But
if Manchester, or even Lancashire, sustain the
struggle singly, it will be unsuccesful, and, in all

my learned friend, as to the manner in
which the conference delegates were occupied. There are three documents relied on by the prosecution:-The executive address which it is not necessary to
refer to, because it was not fastened on
the conference delegates: the executive

probability, retard the movement it was meant committee were the only authors of that
to hasten.

Let the country see to this; the men document, and four only of the executive committee were spoken to.
We

of Lancashire have done nobly; let their breth-

ren throughout the empire arouse; let them have, next, the conference addressto which
speak out at once, like men, and say, 'Yes' or I have been calling your attention; and
' No,' to the great question of 'shall we now then there is the resolution of the delestrike for the Charter?' No higgling-no hesita.

gates.

Gentlemen, so much for the four

tation-no waiting :first counts, and the persons implicated
'If, when done, 'twere well done,
in them. I have already mentioned to you
Then, 'twere well it were done quickly.'
that the defendants for which I appear
"Never, however, for one moment let it betae efendS nsonwhndhI apea
forgotten by any Chartist, that to be successful are Fenton and Stephenson, and I must
they must be peaceful. They have a right to remark that none of these defendants are
strike, but they have no right to riot. They have shewn to be at the conference, or at Mana right to work or not to work, but they have no chester, during any part of these proceedright to break windows, destroy property, or burn ings.

There is no evidence, anything

like satisfactory, to mix up either Fenfactories,
Above all things, they have no right to insult, ton or Stephenson, with the political
It is not
annoy, or fight with the police force or the sol- part of this movement.
diery. Every hellish invention will be practised shown by the evidence that either of
to induce them to do this: let the bridle be kept them did any act to bring about a change
tightly on their tempers and even on their in the laws, I admit that some evidence
tongues: letthem even patiently bear annoyance, has affected them, and that evidence you
insult and indignity; resenting them only by the will have to consider. But you will find

226
that any object which they may have had
was the amelioration of the condition of
the working men by the improvement of
their wages. And if that be your opinion
you must acquit these men upon what I
will now again call the political counts of
this indictment, whatever may. be your
opinions respecting them as to other
counts. There are only two witnesses
who spoke to these defendants, Henry
Brierly, and Buckley. With respect to
Buckley, you will find that he did himself no great credit by his cross-examination in the box, and had my clients' case
rested on his testimony alone, I would
not have much difficulty, but Iam bc*d
to admit his testimony on a comparison
of it with that of Brierly's who spoke to
the same facts, and whose veracity and
accuracy of recollection I have no wish
to impugn. Brierly was present at a
meeting on the 29th of July at Stalybridge.
Fenton was in the chair. A resolution
was moved by a man named Challenger.
That resolution was to this effect, that the
reduction of wages was injurious to all
classes of the community. Stephenson
was at this meeting. Pilling moved a
resolution-that the reduction was injurious and that the workmen should have a
fair day's wages for a fair day's work; and
the meeting were of opinion, that that
could not be obtained without the Charter
becoming the law of the land. I will
now advert to the origin of the meeting
there as a part of the evidence, which
shows that the cause of the cessation from
labour was a dissatisfaction on the part
of the workmen with the scale of remuneration they were receiving; and I
think you will find,with respect to Fenton,
that his actions throughout had reference
to the question of wages, and that he
almost fell a martyr to the preference
which he gave to that question beyond the Charter question, which
others, more politically inclined, sought
to enforce upon him. The next meeting
took place on the 5th of August. The
next witness says:-," I saw a person on
Friday, the 6th of August. Bayley's
hands were among them. They went to
the Haigh. The speakers only advised
them to stick out for a fair day's wages
for a fair day's work. So that both at
the meeting on the 29th of July and that
of the 6th of August, the complaint was

still of the rate of wages. On the 8th of
August, I believe, the next meeting took
place, at which these defendants were
present. Fenton was in the chair. Here
certainly there is no charge that Stephenson or Fenton said anything. But we
find one man present who spoke, and to
a certain extent my clients may be
affected by what he said. Brophy said,
-"

We must let those men at work out

by legal means if possible, or stop them
in lots as they went to their work." This,
I am bound to admit, is a part of the evidence which very materially affects the
defendants for whom I appear. I am not
aware, in looking over the evidence, that
there is anything else which I feel any
difficulty at all in dealing with. They
certainly are traced to a meeting on the
8th of August, and at that meeting some
violent expressions are used; and, as
against these defendants, it will be for
you to consider how far they ought to be
responsible for that language. But neither of these defendants is shown to have
himself used language tending to, or
countenancing, outrage; and neither of
them is shown to have participated in
any of the acts of outrage proved before
you. I put it to you, when you find what
the conduct of these men, especially Fenton, has been on other occasions-I submit to you, that itwould be harsh indeed
to fix a man like him by an indictment
like the present, which charges the defendants with counselling to riot for the
purpose of putting an end to labour.
Unless, therefore, you find that my clients
counselled those who by violence caused
others to stop their labour, they are entitled to an acquittal. And you will find
that these two defendants, on the occasion
to which I am particularly adverting,
are neither fixed with violent language,
or the countenancing of violence, or
any acts of violence that took place.
That is especially the case with respect to Fenton. Because you will
find that on the 9th of August, at
the Haigh meeting, Fenton was there.
Stephenson also was there. Fenton ad.vised them to go orderly. Then we find
that at the meeting on the 11th of August,
(which is the last meeting but one which
took place, that is material for your consideration,) there was a falling out about
the Wage question and the Charter. Fen-

227

ton and Stephenson argued for the Wage'
question. Mahon said they might as
well contend for the Charter. On the
13th of August there was a public meeting. Stephenson was there, and Fenton
was there. Now, observe, on that occasion they had like to have thrown Fenton
out of the cart. They were talking about
sending delegates to the masters to settle
a list of prices. They were like to have
thrown Fenton out of the chair, because
he was advocating the continuance of the
strike for wages, whereas others were for
continuing it for the promotion of the
Charter.
Now, with reference to the
transactions given in evidence by Brierly,
having reference to my clients, there is'
nothing which relates to a later period
than the 13th, and that is, you are aware,
prior to the alleged political conspiracy.
It will be impossible for you to say that
either Fenton or Stephenson was guilty
of any conspiracy at all. Now, gentlemen, I think you will find, that, although
all these defendants were present at the
meeting at Stalybridge, yet the question
there mooted was a Wages question.
Fenton himself underwent severe suffering for his maintenance of the question
of Wages as distinguished from the question of the Charter. Neither of the
defendants participated in the outrages.
One piece of evidence given yesterday
with regard to Fenton was, that a committee was sitting in a room behind a
tavern, and that that committee gave permission to different people to go on with
their work. It was alleged that Fenton
was in the room. I do not recollect that
any more active participation in these
transactions on the part of Fenton was
proved. It was proved, undoubtedly, that,
on one or two occasions, permission had
been given by a number of operatives
sitting in committee to carry on those
works. That may be improper, and, for
anything I know, highly censurable and
illegal; and, if proper measures were
taken, those guilty of such conduct
should be brought to punishment. But
that is not the question to day; however,
that circumstance being proved in this
late period of these transactions, only
shows to me, that, notwithstanding the
prominent position in which the Charter
came to be placed, still that the bottom of
this movement was in the main a move-

ment on the part of the workmen for the
purpose of enhancing, and raising their
wages. You find operatives sitting there
calling themselves operatives-a committee room called a committee room-not a
Chartist room. No political action whatever is traced to that committee, but they
do that, which, in the unfortunate experience you have had of strikes, you know
is not an unfrequent thing. When a
strike takes place, however legal or illegal
it may be, I am not defending it-it is
notorious that those out on strike have
committees sitting in this manner, and
acting in the way in which this committe
did.
Mr. MURPHY :-Brierly said it was
so twelve years ago.
Mr. ATHERTON:-This is shown
incontestably in evidence to be a committee
of operatives seeking by means, which
they thouglt proper, to improve the rate
of' wages. The qestion in this indictment respecting Fenton is, not that he
tookpart in that unjustifiable proceeding
of the committee-the question is, did he
conspire with any one whatever to cause
a change in the law ? There is not a
tittle of evidence to connect him with that
charge. The next is, didlie participate
in any violence to stop the works ? I have
the greatest confidence in the world that
you will find neither of my clients implicated to that extent; and, I trust, that
the mere circumstance of finding them
present at meetings at which foolish
and inflated language was used, will not
induce you to find them guilty of the
charge now preferred against them.
Now, gentlemen, I only fear that I may
have occupied your attention too long by
the remarks which I thought necessary to
make in this case; but when I consider the
nature of the charge-when I consider the
Crown on the one side with all its means and
appliances-when I consider the research
with which every corner and nook of the
kingdom has been searched, to bring evidence against these defendants-when I
consider the nature of the charge, and
the form in which it is preferred, I think
you will bear with me indulgently-I
think, at all events, you will not say I
have wantonly wasted your time in calling your attention to the facts specifically
put in issue. By the indictment you are
to try, it is impossible for you to tell

228
that there are not here two great matters the country, they could bring about such a
put to you. There is, on the one hand, change ? Gentlemen, you would be stulthe charge of political conspiracy-on tifying these men, and running counter
the other, the charge of violent conduct to all the evidence before you, to do so.
on the part of the workmen, as between Up to the time of the strike the Chartist
themselves and their masters. It may body, Chartist leaders, and Chartist orbe that you do not expressly approve of gans, have been shown not only not to be
the change which the Chartists seek-it violent and outrageous, but, on the conmay be you do not quite go with the work- trary, eminently pacific. Gentlemen, I
men in the opinion that their labour is think I would advert to a circumstance
underpaid; but I am sure you will not to which my attention is just called.
allow considerations of that kind to bias You are aware that many of the defenyour mind in the present enquiry, but dants are now present in this court, and
that you will look anxiously to the great watching with natural anxiety the result
mass of evidence before you, and pause of this prosecution, as the evidence seems
and hesitate before you pronounce your to close more about them, and as indiviverdict. Take the advice of her Ma- dual after individual spoke to them.
jesty's Attorney-General, and if you find The Crown called some parties as witthat, with respect to any class of the de- nesses against the Chartists-I make no
fendants, the Crown has left the case complaints-who, formerly, were most
with a reasonable doubt, you will find intimately acquainted with them, and
great satisfaction in acquitting the de- elicited the secrets of the Chartists from
fendants. I must say this for the Char- those who may be said to betray those
tists brought here, that so far as the evi- secrets. I rejoice at it, for had there
dence goes, instead of being a violent been any thing of a violent tendency in
body, they are a most peaceful body of the association of the Chartists, from
men. How is it that at all their meet- that man Cartledge, and from Griffin,
ings you find the words " peace, law, the fact, undoubtedly, would be elicited.
and order"? It has been said these You have been enabled to penetrate the
were mockery, used to deceive, while in most secret counsels and conclaves of the
their hearts those who used them were Chartists, and yet you have not discocounselling violence. I don't agree with vered any thing among them of a violent
that view. The solution is easy and na- character or tendency. You have seen
tural. One of the witnesses said it was Cartledge and Griffin produced here, and
a common watchword-" A fair day's have been led to consider what must be
wages for a fair day's work," and you the feelings of the defendants, when they
find it also proved that ""peace, law, and saw in that box those men, from whom they
order" was a current expression at all had so frequently taken counsel, and from
the Chartist meetings. Do you not whom they shrouded no opinion, probaadmit that? It has been also admitted bably from the time of their birth-what
that the organ of the Chartists up to that must have been their feelings when they
period, had a tendency to promote peace, saw these men come forward as witnesses
law, and order. It is not denied that the to support such a terrible indictment as
object of the Chartists is lawful. No this ? They must have felt strongly indigone can deny that; and you can hardly nant. If these men had been the violent
doubt that the gentleman who sits near men they are represented to be, do you
me [Mr. O'Connor] had great influence think under such circumstances that even
with the Chartists, and, perhaps, may be in this sacred court of justice their concalled the leader of the Chartist agita- duct would be so orderly, decorous
tion; and do you think him so ignorant and pacific as it has been ? Gentlemen, I
as not to know that that agitation is the may point to these men, and appeal to
most powerful which is the most pacific ? their demeanour before you to day as
You have observed the intelligence of corroborating everything that has been
these operatives, and do you think that said with respect to the pacific character
men of that intelligence are so brutish of the Chartists. I have already adverted
and besotted as to fancy, that by exer- to the nature of this charge and the difcising violence and terror, in any part of ferent classes of defendants-I have ad-

229
verted to the facts indisputably proved in
the case, and I shall now conclude with
one remark-among the Chartists as well
as amongst other men seeking political
changes there will be firebrands-men
who will seek to create discontent, as well
as discussion; these men will tell their
hearers that there is one law for the rich
and another for the poor, but their conduct should not be made prejudicial to the
party to which they are attached. Gentlemen, amongst other offices which you
have now to fulfil is this most important
one,-y ou have to teach these men that
at the hands of a British jury-at the
hands of a special jury of this country-at the hands of men consisting not of
their own class, they will receive the most
patient attention, and the most intelligent
administration of justice.
appear for
.Mr. Mc OUBREY :-I
James Mooney, John Thornton, and
William Aitkin.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
My Lord, I withdraw the prosecution so
far as Thornton is concerned. I think it
right here to state that the evidence of
identity was not satisfactory, and evidence
of his good character having been given,
I thought it proper to withdraw.
The JUDGE: - You appear, Mr.
Mc Oubrey, for Mooney and Aitkin ?
Mr. Mc OUBREY :-Yes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-Then you will take an
acquittal for Thornton.
The Jury, at the direction of his Lordship, acquitted Thornton.
Mr. Mc OUBREY:-It becomes now
my duty to address you on behalf of the
defendants Aitkin and Mooney, and I
think I may best bespeak your attention
when I tell you that I intend to make but
a very few observations. Indeed, after
the laborious investigations of the week,
and after four speeches being made on
behalf of the defendants already, I feel
that it would be imposing on you an unnecessary and unreasonable task to drag
you again over the same ground which
as been trodden so much more ably by
my more learned and more eloquent
friends. To detail to you the same facts
-to hold up to you the same placards,
which have been posted over the walls
of England, and which are notorious to all, and to draw from all
these precisely the same conclusions,

would indeed be an unnecessary labour
especially considering that many of the
defendants have determined on defending
themselves; and they have a right to
expect a patient and indulgent hearing
at your hands. I shall not, therefore,
go again into the general principle of
the case-I shall content myself with
drawing your attention to the evidence
as it affects the two defendants for whom
I especially appear-Aitkin and Mooney.
I find, gentlemen, that Aitkin very early
appears in these proceedings. I think
at the very first meeting which is brought
before your notice-at the Haigh. He
is proved to have been at a meeting in
Ashton, and some violent expressions
uttered at that meeting are ascribed to
This is the evidence against
him.
him. Now, the witness who testifies to
these violent expressions has told you
plainly the words which he says were
uttered, but he has told you as plainly
that he can recollect no more of what
was said, and can give no explanation.
Now, I ask you, is it credible that a man
should recollect these expressions, and
recollect no more ? It is not credible.
It does not bear upon it the character ot
truth or honesty; but it bears upon it
the character of a preconcerted lie. He
confines himself to a short statement,
and takes care not to complicate it with
anything that may confound it. Such
is the fact, and you will be more strongly
impressed with this view of the case if
you turn your attention to what follows
with respect to Aitkin. Those very
men, one of whom is said to have used
the expression, " The reckoning day is at
hand," commence their proceedings with
singing
the worship of God, and join min
one of the most impressive hymns that a
religious man, conversant with the devotions of this country, could use. I shall
read it for you, in order to show from the
hymn itself the strong internal evidence
which this witness's testimony bears to
the peaceable character of these men" A charge to keep I have,
A God to glorify;

A never-dying soul to save,
And fit it for the sky."
Now, gentlemen, you are called upon to
bgieve-and believe it if you can-that
whilst they were engaged in this solemn
worship, with the name of God upon
Q

230
their lips, and with their attention so
turned to their immortal souls, they were
at that instant meditating an insult upon
him, by preparing to have recourse to
I
scenes of violence and bloodshed!
don't believe it, gentlemen; and I have
little hesitation in saying, that you will
not put a stigma on your country by sup,
posing, that this is a country in which
such a monstrous thing could be done.
Let us look at the next scene in which
we find Aitkin engaged. The second
witness says,-" At another meeting,
(this is the meeting of the 12th, three
days afterwards, and Aitkin was there,)
the language was, " they would use peaceful means to fetch ou' the hands." To
his Lordship the answer was, "They
came out of their own accord." The
witness knows nothing else. He does
not know what they met for, more
than to hear a lecture on peace and order.
There, gentlemen, is all the evidence
that exists against Aithin. I shall not,
therefore, tire your attention with one
other observation on the subject. I shall,
now turn to the evidence as it affects,
Mooney, and this depends on a man of
e has-sworn
the name of Cartledge.
that Mooney was, present at a meeting in
Scholefield's chapel. On going over the
names of the persons present, he has.
merely mentioned Mooney as one. It
becomes important for us to consider the
character of that meeting. You have
heard that so detailed to you, that it
would be a waste of time to go over it
again, but I shall mention, what was the
fact. Although Cartledge, at first, en-.
deavoured to throw the odium of secrecy
upon that meeting, yet, when cross-ex-.
amined, he acknowledged that a deputation from the trades cam.e, there.. At
first they were refused permission to,
form part of the meeting, but they were
allowed to remain; and it appeared, also,
that any one else might come and compose part of the audience, Again and.
again it has been explained to you, that
that conference metfor peaceful purposes,
that its language was peaceful, and therefore I have iio hesitation in saying, that
you will not believe any charge of conspiracy against Mooney, solely on.i
ground of his.being at that meeting. ,Bht
another witness is produced here withl great
pomp and great expectation-I mean the

itness .Whittam. Some men told hin; a
they came from the confbrene, that they
were about to repel force by fbree; that
they had some double-barrelled guns
anrid some single-barrelled guns, and
that they were like a mighty army to
make war upon the British governWhy this would be high
ment.
treason, if proved, but there was no such
thing talked of at the conference, and;'
therefore, I have little hesitation in saying you will not believe it. You have
these witnesses, and the facts, such as
they are, before you. You have given
them your patient attention, and I am.
sure you will not give a less attentive
hearing to the still small voice that
speaks in the internal evidence of those
statements. Gentlemen, I think I canI
best plead the cause of my clients in this
brief way. I shall not dwell on the
points of the Charter. This.is not the
place or time for such observations.
You have not been brought here to decide whether the Charter shall be the
law of the land or not-whether universal suffrage is consistent with the.
law or not, or- whether it is consistent
with the rights of man, or not; but I
trust you will show, by your verdict;
that the descendants of the men who
have struggled in every age of our history to maintain the right by which you
sit there-that these men are not guilty
off the crime of-conspiracy because they
have fearlessly expressed their sentiments on these subjects.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-There are some
of the defendants that wish to address
the Court, mny Lord, in their defence.
The JUDGE :-Very well, I shalltake
them inthe order in which they appear on
the list...
Mr.O'CONNOR :-I trust your Lordship will have no objection to hear them
according to the arrangement which they
have made themselves.
The JUDGE :-I do not object to take
them in any order.
believe, my
Mr O'CONNOR : -I
Lord; they have arranged the brder in
which they will speak.
The JUDGE :-I .'have no objection
to hear them in whatever orde is,. mat
copvenient to thengelcs.
NIMNWEYT
GEORE ,JULIN
then rose to address the jury.

231
The JUDGE :--Who is that?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Harney, my
Lord. The defendant Harney then
spoke as follows:May it please your Lordship, gentlemen of the Jury;--In rising to defend
myself from the charges preferred against
me, I must crave the indulgence of the
Court for any imperfections in my defence-imperfections which are extremely
likely to be made, caused by the novel
situation in which I find myself placed,
and my total ignorance of all the forms
of law. Had I consulted the views of
many of my friends I would probably
have, instead of defending myself employed one of the many learned and
talented gentlemen around me to advocate my cause, but, conscious of my innocence, and disdaining the arts of policy-believing that " thrice is he armed who
hath his quarrel just," I appear before
you to defend my own cause, believing,
in spite of the array of legal talent opposed to me, that I can convince you of
my innocence and the injustice of the
charges against me in the indictment,
Gentlemen, I pass over the barbarous
phraseology of the indictment-phraseology which certainly gave me no little
trouble in my endeavours to find out
what really was the offence with which I
was charged, and upon which, as a civilian, not understanding the terms employed therein, I might have very fairly
commented-I pass by that and many
other topics upon which I would have
commented but for two reasons,-first, I
feel that I have no right to occupy the
time of this Court to the hindrance of the
other defendants who have to follow me;
and second, because I feel that I ought to
detain you as short as possible, in consideration of the labour you have already
had to perform, and hence, gentlemen, I
will come at once to the question. Allow
me here to remark, that to me it appears
passing strange, that while I occupy a
prominent place in this indictment, I
find no mention made of my name in the
opening address of the Attorney-General,
nor any evidence offered against me until
the morning of Saturday last, when Cartledge gave evidence that I was at the
conference. Strange, gentlemen, that
there should be so little evidence against
Well,
one of the chief conspirators?

gentlemen, I find myself charged with
having conspired, with a number of persons, to the number of fifty-eight; of
these fifty-eight I am only well acquainted with one, viz., Samuel Parkes,
of Sheffield; with about fifteen or twenty
of the defendants I am partially acquainted, but these I know mostly only
by name, while with from thirty-five to
forty of the defendants, I am totally
unacquainted; I never heard tell of them
before my arrest; when I was taken to
Kirkdale gaol I, for the first time, met
some of these persons-but still so little
do I know of them, that, were they placed
before me now, and my life depended on
the issue, I assure you, gentlemen, that
I could not distinguish even twelve of
them by their names. Some reside at
Ashton, some at Manchester, some in
other parts of Lancashire; I reside in
Sheffield; what connection could there
have been between them and me? Letters and papers were taken from me
when I was arrested; the prosecutor has,
no doubt, looked through them, is there
any letter from any one of these defendants to me ? A considerable number
of the defendants have been treated in
the nanner that I was, letters were taken
from them,-is there any one of these
letters from me ? Can the prosecutor
show that there was any connection between me and them ? He cannot; what
then becomes of the charge that I conspired with these men -men I never
knew-men whom, previous to my arrest, I never saw ? I find I am charged
with conspiring, on the 1st day of
August, and following days, with those
persons out on strike, not only to compel men to leave their employment,
but also by terror and alarm to effect a
great change in the laws and constitution
of this realm. Now, gentlemen, no evidence has been offered to show that there
was any strike, turn-out, or disturbance
on the 1st of August,-what then becomes of the charge that I conspired on
the 1st of that month ? The strike cornmenced on the 8th of August, but, as has
been shown over and over again, the strike
at the outset was for wages, and not for
the Charter. In fact, the Charter was
never mentioned until the 10th of August, when, at a meeting of trades' delegates held in the Carpenters' Hall, Man-

232
chester, certain resolutions were passed
approbatory of the principles of the Charter and declaratory of the necessity of
the legal enactment of those principles to
secure to the working classes their rights
-this was the first time we find the Charter even named-this was the 10th of
August, yet we are charged with conspiring to bring about a great change in the
constitution, and that on the 1st of August ! Gentlemen, you have had laid
before you a great deal of evidence touching these trades' delegate meetings. I
protest against that evidence; we have
nothing to do with what the trades' delegates did; their names are not in this indictment, and hence I presume that they
did nothing illegal; if they had, I suppose that the Government would have
prosecuted them; well, if they did nothing illegal, why is evidence of their
doings brought against us who had nothing to do with them ? Gentlemen, 1
have shown you that the strike did
not commence until the 8th of August,
that the Charter was never even mentioned until the 10th of August; and
now I will show you that I knew nothing of the strike until the 13th of August. Gentlemen, the strike commenced
on the 8th, the march to Manchester was
on the 9th; on Wednesday the 10th,
early in the day, I left Sheffield, my business as a bookseller and news-agent
compelling me occasionally to leave home.
I was absent until the Saturday, when on
my return home on the railway I for the
first time heard of the strike, but it was
not until I reached mny home, and had
put into my hands the local papers, that
I became fully acquainted with the first
movements of the turn-outs; and it was
not until the next day, August the 14th,
that I became aware that a portion of the
turn-outs had declared in favour of
the Charter. Yet, in spite of these well
known facts, we are charged with conspiracy on the 1st of August! The
learned gentlemen who addressed you
yesterday evening and this morning
have laid much stress upon the strict
legality of men agitating for the obtainment of the document called the People's
Charter. They have said, and, I think,
very justly, that no matter whether these
principles be founded in error or wisdom,
there can be no illegality in the peaceful
and constutitutional

Up to the 13th of August I have told
you that I knew nothing of the strike.
Up to the 16th I had no participation
with the turn-outs, direct or indirect. I
think it very strange that, while I am
placed prominently in this indictment,
the Attorney-General in his opening address never mentioned my name; and, I
believe, up to Saturday morning, my
name was not mentioned by any of the
witnesses. On Saturday morning, I believe some evidence was given by a person named Griffin, to show that I was
present at the conference of delegates in
Manchester. Cartledge, I believe, was
the witness who said so. Now, gentlemen,
I admit that I was at that meeting. I am
not ashamed of my conduct there; I will
not shrink from avowing that I was there.

And, without wishing to detain you long,
I shall relate what was done at that meeting, and explain how I came there. On
the 16th of August, I left Sheffield to
attend this conference.
Gentlemen, I
beleve the sum total of the evidence
against me is, that I attended this conference.
How came I to attend that
conference ? I will briefly answer the
question. It has been already shown,
that the calling of this conference was
originally suggested by the Hunt monument committee: how it was suggested I
will show. On or about the 8th of June,
1842, an address from the committee was
published ; in that address is the following paragraph :-

" The committee held a long and proper discussion as to whether we have the power, without
being considered to have outstripped the power
delegated to us, by offering a suggestion to the
members of the New Executive, which ended in
a resolve" That, in order to make the gathering of good
men from various parts of the country to be
doubly useful to the movement, and answver two
purposes, we most respectfully suggest that they,
the members of the Executive, discuss the propriety of calling a national conference of delegates, to be held on the following day, August
17th, in the Carpenters' Hall, Manchester, when
perhaps a friendly understanding could be esta.
blished, all ill-feeling and bickering amongst
leaders put an end to, the plan of organization
read, discussed, and, if necessary, revised, and
all jealousy for ever banished from our ranks.
Differences arise frequently through misunder.
advocacy of them. standing-men who have done wrong uninteu-

233

tionally are denounced and looked shy upon- exchange comfort for poverty, plenty for starta-.
who, if remonstrated with, could be made ac- tion, and freedom for submission. They do not
quainted with their error, and have some chance see any just or wise remedy in violence or insurof reform, and, for the want of which, the cause rection, neither do they see wisdom in uncomsometimes loses both their talents and influence. plaining obedience and servile silence. [Nor do
If this desirable end could be achieved, it would I, gentlemen.] Therefore they are prepared to
recommend peaceful and constitutional ULTERIOR

give an opportunity for the delegates when as- MEASURES as soon as they have gained the legal
sembled, to adopt other measures which they opinion of an eminent barrister, at the head of
in their wisdom might deem necessary and the movement, whose judgment will not be
prudent for the advancement of the cause."

Gentlemen, Griffin, the secretary to this
committee, has avowed that he it was
who first suggested to the committee this
proposition of calling the conference ;allow me to read the conclusion of this
address, it will serve to illustrate the
character of the writer, Mr. Griffin:
" In conclusion, we intend to do our duty,
and believe that you, to whom this humble appeal
is made, will do yours; and may you and we
work harmoniously together, until every man
possess his rights and liberties, and may the
Ruler of the Creation stamp your and our exertions with the seal of his divine approbation.
Until then,
1"We remain,

" In the bonds of Friendship and Brotherhood,
' Your humble Servants,
"Signed on behalf of the Monument Committee,
" WILLIAM GRIFFIN,

Secretary."

On or about the 4th of July, an address
was published by the Chartist Executive
committee, officially calling this conference
-in that address the intended business
and objects of the proposed conference
were set forth as the following paragraph
will show :" ORGANIZATION.-The aspect of the move-

ment, and the strength and position of the Association, were taken into mature consideration,
and it was resolved to draw up a district plan for
the whole nation, to prepare a plan for securing
commodious meeting houses, to recommend ways
and means of defraying the attendant expenses
of the movement, and for the purpose of practically working these measures, and discussing

others of equal importance, and of devising effectual means of preventing divisions and all squabbles for the future in the National Charter Assotion."

Il ideas of violence were emphatically
opposed and denounced, witness the following paragraph:" The Executive have seriously deliberated
u1pon the distress of the people, and deplore the
absence of the suffrage, which could so speedily

biassed by the fear of the government, but whose
opinion will be tempered by anxiety for the
success of the cause, and care for safety of the
people.
" The Executive will, therefore, be prepared to
recommend measures of peaceful resistance to
the assembled conferences of the association,
where they will have the benefit of the opinions
of the leading councillors of the National Charter Association."

Is there anything illegal in a conference
so called ? It must be remembered that
Chartist conferences are not the only conferences that have been held; a well
known, talented, and, in the sister country if not in this, I believe a popular gentleman, namely, Mr. Daniel O'Connell,
is in the habit of holding weekly large
meetings of his friends and admirers, the
objects of which meetings, we are assured
by conservative writers, is the dismemberment of the empire. Gentlemen, I
don't believe that, but this I will say,
that if Mr. O'Connell's meetings are legal,
surely a conference called as I have
shown is at least as legal. Conferences
have been called together by a gentleman
well known to the public, viz. Mr. Joseph
Sturge, the avowed object of which conferences was the carrying through the
legislature of the six points of the Charter. There can have been nothing illegal
in such conferences, for the government
has not prosecuted the parties attending
them. Surely the Chartist conference in
question was equally legal. Huge conferences have been held in Manchester,
called together by the Corn-law repealers.
Great capitalists and dissenting clergymen have in large numbers attended
these conferences. Far be it from me to
impute to those parties anything illegal
in their acts; on the contrary, I feel
bound to believe that their acts have been
strictly legal, otherwise the government
would have subjected them to prosecution; but I dare challenge comparison of

234
their speeches and acts with those of
the Chartist conference. If the former
were legal, the latter has been a thousand
times more so. Gentlemen, something
has been said of the meeting held on the
Good Friday of 1842, at which was laid
the foundation stone of Hunt's monument. I was present at that meeting,
and if there was no harm, no illegality
in attending the meeting at which the
foundation stone of this monument was
laid, surely there was no more harm, no
more illegality, in attending the meeting
intended to be held in celebration of
the completion of that monument. Gentlemen, without further preface, I will now
come to the conference, and the acts of
that body. Gentlemen, it was on the 15th
.of July that I was elected to the conference at a public and legal meeting of
the working classes, and others, of Sheffield. This was nearly a month before the
commencement of the strike, and when
by no possibility could I have foreknown the events that were about to
I have shewn you that I
transpire.
knew nothing of the strike until the 13th
.of August. Well, on the 16th I left
Sheffield for Manchester, and, arrived
there, I found that not only the procession but also the intended meeting had
been postponed by the monument committee, rather than risk a collision with
the authorities. Permit me here to remark, that had the Chartists wished to
,promote tumult and insurrection, they
would have pursued a very different
course to that which they did. Had
-they wished to promote revolution, would
they not have appealed to the immense
masses of men at that time on strike, to
come to Manchester on the 16th, and
then and there avenge the wrongs of a
more memorable 16th of August ? Did
they do so ? No; on the contrary, they
forbade the meeting, and gave up the
procession, that there might be no chance
of disorder or bloodshed. Gentlemen, I
think you will admit that I did not go to
Manchester for the purpose of engaging
ina physical-force struggle with the authorities, when I tell you that I took my
wife with me to see the Hunt monument
and attend the festive meetings in celebration of its completion. Had I intended to have gone to war, it is not
likely I would have had my wife with

me. I have been sworn to as having
been seen in Leach's shop. Well, Gentlemen, I suppose there is no illegality in
being seen in a public shop; that evening (the 16th) I, with my wife, attended
the tea-meeting in the Carpenters' Hall,
where the only signs of conspiracy I saw
was the apparent universal determination
to get rid of the tea and toast as soon as
possible. On the 17th, the delegates
met; it has been insinuated that it was
a sort of secret meeting, and that there
was an understanding that the proceedings of the meeting were not to be published; there is no truth in this, gentlemen; the meeting was open to all Manchester, if they could have been accommodated with seats; indeed, I wished
my wife to be present, but she refused
on the very natural ground that there
were no females present. Now, gentlemen, I think, had the delegates been
conspiring, I would not have wished to
have brought my wife into their meeting-for, with feelings of the most profound respect for the ladies present in
this Court, I must say, that when men
do conspire, they are not in the habit
of letting the ladies share their secrets.
That the proceedings of the conference
were not intended to be secret is proved
by the fact of reporters being present.
Griffin was there as a reporter; and, if
the whole staff of reporters attached
to the Manchester press were not there,
the fault was theirs, not the delegates.
Griffin took notes as a reporter, and if he
did not use them in the usual way it
only shews that he was there as a spy.
Something has been said of the violence
of one or more of the delegates; the prosecutor has not brought, and cannot
bring, any such charge against me.
What says the notes taken from Brooke,
of Todmorden, respecting myself? I believe the sum and substance of what concerns me in these notes are these
words:-" Julian Harney, no connexion
with the middle class."
The JUDGE:-The notes found :n
Tear e-not
pdedbnt
ot
Brooke are not produced against you as
they are not brought against
evidence,
you at all.
Mr. HARNEY :-I am aware, my
Lord, that these notes have not been produced against me as evidence. I know,

235
they cannot be: but, if they were, what
do they amount to ?
The JUDGE :-They are no evidence
at all against you. They were not produced for that purpose.
Mr. HARNEY :-Then, my Lord, I
will pass over that, by simply remarking,
that,if so produced, they would only shew,
either that I was opposed to any union
with the middle class, or else that I had
no hope of the middle class uniting with
the Chartist body for Chartist purposes,not much violence there. I now come
to the resolution adopted by a majority
of the conference.
" That whilst the Chartist body did not originate the present cessation from labour, this conference of delegates from various parts of England, express their deep sympathy with their
constituents, the working men now on strike;
and that we strongly approve the extension and
the continuance of their present struggle till the
People's Charter becomes a legislative enactment, and decide forthwith to issue an address to

that effect; and pledge ourselves, on our return
to our respective localities, to give a proper direction to the people's efforts." (Signed)
" JAMES AaTHUa, Chairman.
"J. ARRAN, Secretary."

The witnesses Cartledge and Griffin
have both given evidence, that in the conference I opposed the resolution, upon
which is founded this prosecution : I did
not extract these admissions from the witnesses by cross-examining them, I have
not said a word to any one of the immense number of witnesses produced here
on the part of the crown. You have then
the evidence of these witnesses that I opposed this resolution. I don't thank
these persons for their admissions, nor
will I take advantage of them, to endeayour to clear myself at the expense of
others. Gentlemen, if I did not support
this resolution in the conference, I will
defend it here. What says the resolution ? It denies that the Chartists originated the strike; that is a truth; it has
never been pretended by the prosecution,
that the Chartists did originate the strike;
who were the originators is what has never yet been made public; though the
government have instituted an enquiry
into the origin of the strike; why has not
the government made their report of the
resuilt of that enquiry ? The resolution

expresses sympathy with the men on
strike. Is there any harm, any illegality
in expressing sympathy with our suffering fellow-men ?The resolution next
expresses approbation of the present struggle until the Charter becomes a legislative enactment; great stress has been laid
upon the word struggle, as though by it
was meant a physical force combat with
the authorities. Nothing of the sort is
meant. There has never been a resolution pledging the people to continue the
agitation for the Charter but in which
this word struggle has been found. I
have spoken at public meetings in support of such resolutions, nay, I have
drawn up many such resolutions, and I
maintain I have done nothing illegal. It
is the moral struggle of right against
wrong, justice against privilege, that is
meant by the authors and supporters of
this resolution. The resolution concludes
by pledging the delegates to give on
their return home a proper direction to
Well, gentlemen)
the people's efforts.
what was my conduct on my return to
Sheffield ? What was the direction I gave
to the people's efforts? Why, I opposed
the extension of the strike to that town,
and prevented any strike or turn-out taking place. That, I conceived was giving
a proper direction to the people's efforts;
and I rejoice that by the influence I possess with the working classes of that town,
I was able to give such a direction to the
people's efforts. An address was adopted by the conference. I was not present
when that address was adopted, but I approve of it, and would defend it if it were
necessary. Much has been said respecting a certain extraordinary document, as
it has been called, ascribed to the Char..
tist Executive. Not one tittle of evidence
has been produced to show that I had
any connexion with this address, that I
knew anything of its authorship or publi.
cation. Had any evidence been offered
against me, I would have defended myself from the charge. None has been offered, and I disdain to take up theI queshave
tion; it is beneath my notice.
On the 18th
done with the conference.
of August I returned home, and on thea
19th, I reported to a large public meeting the proceedings of the conference, so
little idea had I that I had done anythiij
illegal. On Monday, the 22nd o Atx-

236

gust, a meeting was held in Paradise- reads an account of it. I take it as part
square, to consider the propriety of com- of a statement now.
mencing the strike in Sheffield. I at- HARNEY proceeds :-" On this the Northtended that meeting; a resolution was emrn Star put the interpretation, that the plan
proposed, the intent and meaning of which was rejected, merely as to the turn-out by the
I understood to be, that the strike should masters, but they had acted upon it by causing
be forthwith commenced. I opposed the a turn-out by the workmen. He quoted also
proposition; I moved an amendment O'Connor's account of his conversation with
against the strike; I carried my amend- Acland, during the sitting of the late anti-cornment by a large majority, and the conse- law conference, in which Acland is represented
quence was, there was no strike in Shef- to have said "The object of the present meet.
field. With your permission I will read ing in London is to take into consideration the
my speech upon that occasion, as re- stopping of the mills on a given day; and they
ported in the Shefield Independent.
t is not long, gentlemen, for, as you are
probably aware, reporters, both for the
liberal and conservative press, are not in
the habit of reporting Chartists' speeches
at any great length.
" GEORGE J. HARNEY

[Chartists are not

called Misters by reporters] said, they had an important question to discuss, to which every man
should address himself honestly. They did not
want opinions to-day about the Charter, about
democracy, or the usual topics. The man who
had proposed a strike, had put the question
fairly before the meeting. He objected to the
strike, al he had done among the delegates at
Manchester. He believed it resulted from the
intrigues of the anti-corn-law party. In support
of this opinion he read several quotations from
speeches and newspapers, which had appeared in
the Northern Star. There was particularly one
from the Sunday Times, claiming for that paper
the credit of having first proposed that the
manufacturers should close their mills, which
proposition the anti-corn-law conference discussed and rejected."-[Claiming for that paper
the credit of recommending the strike]j-On this
the Northern Star put the interpretation, that
the plan was rejected, merely-

will do it." As further evidence that the strike
was got up by the Repealers, he said that the
middle classes of Ashton and Staley-bridge subscribed £9 to furnish the first turn-outs with the
means of going to Preston and elsewhere to stop
the mills there. Yet, now that Chartism, or the
Chartist leaders, had foolishly allied themselves
with the strike, these men tried to throw the
odium on them. If the Chartist leaders had
taken a false step, they ought not to follow
them, and they could even asist them better by
not striking. Let them think what they were
about to do! Were the trades of Sheffield
Chartist already ? If they were, would they, at
the fiat of that meeting, turn out to a man ? In
some trades there might be a majority of Chartists, but the acting and leading men, the committee-men and the secretaries, and the speakers
of the trades, were not Chartists. They were
supporters of the corn-law repealers, and their
If it
Harney!
constant language was, "-had not been for him and O'Connor, we should
have got the repeal of the corn laws long ago."
These men had a bitter hatred to Chartism and
the Charter, and to all who figured in their
movement.
" He did not believe that the majority of the
trades were Chartists. They might carry a re-

Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-Acting solution here to cease work, and hundreds would
in the same spirit, indicated by the At- cease; but would those who were not present
torney-General, I do not interpose here:
be bound by it? He was sure they would not;
but I apprehend that the defendant, in
strictness, has no right to read this.
The JUDGE :-It is a statement of
his own conduct.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-The defendant is
reading it now, and it is quite competent for him to put it in evidence afterwards.
The JUDGE:-This is a statement
of what his conduct was, but, instead of
putting it in the form of a statement, he

but to-morrow morning the majority of the workshops and the wheels would be going. Those
who had struck might assemble and turn them
out, but would that make them Chartist? When
they were out, would they stop out ? Men who
turned out, not for the Charter, but for fear of
having their heads broken, when the turn-outs
had left them, or when military protection was
afforded them, would resume their labour in
spite of the turn-outs. Even the Northern Star

237
assured them that many of the men who had
been turned out in other towns had resumed
work. In Halifax, they were turned out on
Monday; blood was shed on Tuesday; but on
Thursday the men returned to their work. Were
the men of Sheffield going to make fools of themselves by passing a resolution for a strike, and
then act as the men of Halifax had done? If
they were going to strike, was it not worth while
to spend a few hours in considering the subject.
He hoped that some of the bold, fire-eating fellows who blamed him, would stand forth and
give their reasons. Before he could consent to
the strike, he must be satisfied of two thingsfirst, that the trades of Sheffield were Chartists,
and secondly, that they would turn out of themselves, for the Charter, without coercion.
" If the strike were universal and peaceful,
and were to take place on a given day, then
perhaps their object could be accomplished
before they would be famished. But, were they
now to turn out, before the end of the week
hundreds would be starving. He would have
no part in this. He was not a cutler, or a shoemaker, or a bricklayer. If he held up his hand
for the strike, he should turn them out, but he
should keep himself in. It was impossible for
him to give up work. His work was to sell
newspapers, and to furnish reports to a certain
paper. If they were to turn out, they could
not do without a paper, and as many of them as
could muster the money would come to him on
Saturday for the Star. He must sell them, and
thus he should be getting his belly filled while
they were starving. In all troublesome times,
the newspapers had a harvest: editors, vendors,
and proprietors of newspapers, knew well that
routs, riots, tumults, and rebellions, produced
them profit. He sold more Stars last week by
a hundred than he had ever done before, and no
doubt it would be the same next Saturday. It
might be very fine fun for him to promote a
strike;. but what a wretch should he be were he
to promote a course which would bring profit to
him,.while it would leave them without food.
"The speakers who preceded him had done
anything but come to the question. I repeat, are
you ready to fight the soldiers? You may say
that this is not the question; but I tell you that
would be the question. I do not think you are.
I am ready to share your perils, but I will not
lead you against the soldiers. I am no soldier;
and the man who undertakes to lead the people
in a conflict with the military, undertakes an

awful responsibility, which no man should undertake unless he has confidence that he sees
his way to lead the people to victory, and rescue
them from the difficulties into which he must
plunge them."

Gentlemen, my opposition to the projected strike was successful, and though
for my conduct I have had the abuse
and calumny of some of my own party,
I have never regretted the part I played
that day. In Sheffield there has been
no disturbances- no collisions of the people and the military-no marshalling of
police-no calling out of the yeomanryno swearing in of special constables-no
reading of the riot act, in short they

preserved peace throughout the whole
period of the disturbances elsewhere, and

yet I am charged with having conspired
to effect, by force and tumult, a change
in the constitution. And upon whose
evidence,

gentlemen ?

First,

Griffin,

who has been for many years a professing Chartist; he has filled responsible
and popular situations in the Chartist
movement; he has long been known as
a reporter for Chartist newspapers; he
was the first person who suggested the
calling of the conference, yet he has
appeared

in

the

witness-box

against

those who he was the principal instrument of bringing together; he has appeared before you in the character of a
betrayer of his former associates. The
evidence of such a man should be received with caution; he has disregarded
all the obligations of friendship, and
treacherously violated the trust and confidence reposed in him-may not such a
man deceive you ? In the address which
I have quoted, this Griffin talks of the
virtue and glory of a public man con-

sisting in remaining faithful to his prin.
ciples till death; and now see him doing
his utmost to destroy the men who remain faithful to the principles he has
betrayed. In the conclusion of his address, he hypocritically appeals to the

Ruler of the Creation, to stamp with the
seal of his divine approbation the exertions of myself and brother defendants

for the obtainment of the Charter.
What a base hypocrite must this man
be. He calls upon us to do our duty
as he pledges himself to do his. Behold
the fulfilment of his pledge! He has

appeared in the witness-box against him

238
iupon -whose funds - he so long sbsisted,
and against men who relieved him in his
need, and saved him from the pangs
-and horrorp :of starvation,-thus snakelike stinging the hand that fed, and fixing his envenomed fangs into those who
nourished him. Upon the evidence of
this man I was arrested, dragged from
horne, and insulted by the grossly illegal
annoyance to which I was subjected;
when, not content with arresting my person, the officer who arrested me searched
my home, and took away letters, books,
&c.; and all this in violation of the law.
The other witness, Cartledge, was a
delegate, gave his support to the resolution passed by the conference, (I believe
seconded the address adopted by the delegates), and was a violent supporter of the
strike. Surely, gentlemen, you will not
convict me upon the evidence of men so
-base as these. But if the verdict should
be" Guilty," though the cold prison cell
-though my consignment to the living
tomb of crime and misery should be the
consequence, yet, believe me, gentlemen,
I speak not the language of idle rant or
bombastic folly, when I declare to you,
that I would not change my present situation for that of my accusers to escape all
that torture could inflict upon me.
Though my march from this court was to
the scaffold, there to exchange the em-'
braces of love for the cold grasp of the
executioner's red reeking hand, there to
yield up life with its heart-correcting sorrows, its hopes and joys, alas, too few, for
that unfathomable futurity beyond the
grave, -I
would not-I speak the
language of calm reflection-exchange
my lot for that of my accusers. Let them
shrink from the light of day, let them fly
from the haunts of their species, and
alone-cut off from the sympathies of
their fellow-creatures and the love of their
kind,i feast on the reward of their treachery
and riot on the gains of their fiendish
falsehood; let them not forget their
broken pledges and violated vows, vows
,of adherence to a cause they have so infamously betrayed - the remembrance
,ofethese will add a relish to their enjoyments and a zest to their pleasures. But,
gentlemen, there will come a day when
they will have their reward, when reflections sting shall poison all, when the
worm of memory shall gnaw at their

hearts, and, like the Prometnean vulture,
feast upon theirvitals, until the consciencestricken wretches shall wither beneath the
tortures of conscious guilt, and, dying,
shall go down to the grave without the
love of wife or child, countryman or
friend, to shed a tear to their memoriesremembered only to be execrated, and
thought of only with feelings of the
utmost loathing and disgust. Gentlemen,
I feel that it is as a Chartist, not as a
Conspirator, that I am arraigned here.
I am a Chartist, and I glory in the name.
I not only believe Chartism to be founded
in truth, but that the legal establishment
of Chartist principles is absolutely indispensable to raise the working-classes from
their present wretched and degraded
state. Witnesses have appeared before
you who have gravely assured this Court
that they were not cognizant of any distress in their localities. I know, gentlemen, that, at any rate, there is deep distress in Sheffield. In the course of the
last year, five poor-rates have been levied
upon the town; the poor-rate amounting
last year to seven shillings in the pound.
The inmates of the Poor-house, in December last, numbered nearly eight hundred; the able-bodied poor on the parish
numbered about a thousand.
In the
year 1837, there was paid to the casual
poor the sum of £700; at the present
time the payments to the out-door poor
amount to above £15,000 per annum.
Trades' unions have been much calumniated; and it must be admitted by their
bitterest opponents that these associations
have done an immensity to stave off
the ruin of the middle class by preventing
that class being wholly eaten up by poorrates. The Table-knife-grinders' Union
paid to their unemployed hands in the
course of the years 1837-38-39-40-41,
the sum of 13,8951., and in the course of
four years and a half only ten of the
Sheffield trades have paid to their unemployed hands no less a sum than 29,3561.
I will say no more on this subject, but
remind her Majesty's Attorney-General
of the speech of Mr. Ward, the member
for Sheffield, in which at great length he
described the distress and sufferings of the
working classes of Sheffield, one of his
authorities being James Montgomery,
Esq,, the well known poet, who, gentlemen, if he was a Jacobite or lhartist

239
-when he was sentenced to three months' things proclaim, trumpet-tongued, that
imprisonment and a fine of 201. for the privileged classes of society have
writing a song in praise of the French abused the powers they have exercised;
Republic-is well known to be a Conser- that they are neither fit to govern the navative of the first water now, and he has tion at large, nor themselves as a class;
given most painful evidence of the abject for in working the misery of the millions,
destitution of the labouring classes of they are most certainly conspiring their
Sheffield, The distressis not confined to own ruin. The downward progress of
one part of the country, it extends England must be arrested, or all that has
throughout England, Scotland, and Ire- been predicted by Lord Howick arid others
land. I will not dwell upon the distress as the natural consequences of the preendured at the present moment by the sent state of things, will certainly come to
proud-hearted and independent people of* pass. I have laboured throughout my
Scotland, and as to Ireland, the name is public life to prevent such a conclusion,
sufficient to remind you of its two mil- and for so labouring during the late
lions and a half of mendicants and its strike I am dragged before this tribunal.
lumper-fed peasants, nor will I take up The remedy for the present evils I beyour time in commenting upon the ge- lieve will be found in investing the peoneral state of England-enough that I ple with their rights. I believe I heard
remind you of things in this very county his Lordship remark, that it had been
(of Lancashire) calculated to make us a question mooted in high places whether
blush for tamely allowing such a state of or no a voluntary strike for a political
things to be;-it is enough that I re- object was legal or illegal.-Now, I have
mind you, gentlemen, of tales, alas, too always held the opinion that a voluntary
true, told of the sufferings of the people cessation of the people from their employ.in this very county ;-that Englishmen, ment is legal, no matter for what moveaye, free-born Britons, gentlemen, their ment, and, if I am wrong, I shall be
wives and little ones-soliciting, yes, ac- happy to stand corrected this day, that I
tuallybegging the carrionflesh of diseased, may know what course to pursue for the
destroyed animals, that they might stifle future, if I would save myself from the
the gnawings of hunger with food which meshes of the law. I presume to be a
the wolf might refuse to tear and the Chartist is not to be a criminal. The Atvulture disdain to gorge. And why is torney-General has said, on the trial of
this state of things? Becauf, as a Frost, that the Chartists bad as clear a
Chartist, I believe that the people are not right to agitate for the Charter as the
represented, and their interests are not Whigs of 1832 had to agitate for the
cared for in the legislature. Because, to Reform Bill, adding, that if ever the day
quote the language of Sir George Sin- shall come, that on the side of the Charclair, one of the best men who ever ter shall be arrayed the strength and
sat in the House of Commons, because, sinews, the numbers and intelligence of
as he told the House in his speech, the country, that undoubtedly it will bedelivered in May, 1840, because the mem- come law, and mere wealth will struggle
bers of that House are "admirable repre- against it in vain. This is all we ask;
sensatives of the opulent and the prosper- leave us to enlist public opinion on our
ous, but very sorry legislators for the side, if we can, and we will abide the
industrious and the distressed, eager to issue. But loose not the bloodhounds of
make ample provision for the luxury persecution upon us, nor seek by gaols
and extravagance of the Court-unwilling and scaffolds to stem the onward progress
to take the slightest notice of the interests of mind, for I warn those who would
or necessities of the poor." There, gen- have recourse to such means to put
tlemen, such is the description of the down Chartism that they will miserably
House of Commons, not by a Chartist fail. The dominant sects and prividemagogue, but by a conservative legis- leged classes of all countries inall ages
lator. Chartism has been denounced on have tried by persecution to preserve
all sides, but could even the Chartists have their power, and they have ever failed.
brought the country into a, worst state So sure as. the despised, trampled upon,
than it is? Does not the present state of persecuted Christians triumphed over

240
their enemies and oppressors, beating down by the force of opinion the
power of the pagan hierarchy until the
imperial purple was worn by a convert,
and the followers of the cross became the
acknowledged masters of the Roman
world ;-so sure will the now persecuted
Chartists, having truth for their guide,
and justice for their end, triumph over
present and future opposition, and by the
fobrce of reason and the march of mind
oblige monarchs to acknowledge the justice of their principles, and compel the
privileged classes to vield to the rights of
man-rights based on this glorious principle, "Do unto thy brother as thou
wouldst thy brother should do unto thee."
Gentlemen, that principle is altogether
violated under the present system of legislation. A state of slavery exists in this
country, as real as that Which exists in
Carolina or Constantinople; the difference between the slavery in Turkey and
America and that which exists here, is
that in those countries the slave's body
is sold in the market-place, and in this
country you sell his labour in the house
of legislature. Against such a state of
things I protest, against it I will contend.
If to hold the principles I conscientiously
entertain is to be a seditionist, I am content to be punished as such; and, assured
as I am that in these principles alone will
be found the political salvation of nations,
and the rescuing of the millions from
their present state of physical suffering
and social degradation, I am content to
be regarded through life as a seditionist,
and go down to the grave with the title
of seditionist inscribed upon my tomb.
Gentlemen, if the plain and honest exposition of facts I have laid before you
has been sufficient to convince you of
my innocence, you will acquit me; but
I will not seek to purchase such a verdict
by any abandonment of my principles,
You may incarcerate my body and torture me in your prisons, but you cannot
enchain thought, nor prevent with your
laws and jails the growth of mind: and
so sure as the march of man's intellect is
onward and forward, so sure will these
principles go on, conquering and to conquer. Yes, in the language of the
martyred Muir, "It is a good cause; it
shall ultimately prevail; it shall finally
triumph.'.'"--The conviction,,that cheered

that patriot on the eve of banishment
from his loved land, is my consolation on the threshold of a dungeon.
Gentlemen, I have done; I leave my
case in your hands; I have a right to
expect at your hands a verdict of acquittal; but if your verdict should be the
opposite of what I have a right to anticipate, I trust I shall meet the consequences
of a verdict of guilty with that fortitude
which will become me as a man, and
that unflinching consistency of conduct,
and unyielding devotion to principle,
which should ever characterize the man
who, as I have done, devotes his life to
the service of his fellow-men, and the
promotion of the happiness and welfare
of the whole human family.
The JUDGE:-Is there any other defendant who wishes to address the Court ?
SAMUEL PARKES :- My Lord,
and gentlemen of the jury; in rising
to address you on this occasion, I am
constrained to confess that I feel the
importance and peculiarity of the position
which I am now called to occupy; surrounded, as I am by gentlemen of high
wealth and influence, and opposed too by
gentlemen possessing a vast amount of
talent, learning and ability - opposed
by gentlemen employed by and on
behalf of the Crown - gentlemen possessed of all the advantages of a classical edtication-who have every avenue
opened to them for the attainment of that
knowledge and learning which was necessary for their occupation-opposed by
gentlemen who are considered, no doubt,
by their employers, to possess the greatest
amount of learning of any in the British
Empire, accompanied with long experience, extensive practice, deep research,
and great renown-gentlemen, who have
every adiantage which I do not possess
for collecting together that evidence which
they may consider necessary to find me
guilty-who have had in their possession
the charge against me, and the depositions of witnesses, of which I have been,
up to the present hour deprived-by gentlemen possessing all these advantages,
am I this day opposed. Gentlemen, you
will please to bear in mind the fact I am
about to announce. I, the humble individual before you, am but a poor working
man, altogether ignorant of the technicalities of the law; unacquainted with

241
legal processes and forms of judicature;
having no education except that stolen
from hours of sleep, after days of excessive toil k having by a series of painful
events been deprived of the means of attaining that learning and knowledge
which would be of so much solace to me
now, and for which, from a child, I have
thirsted in vain. You will also bear in
mind, gentlemen, that this is the first
time I have appeared in the character of
a person at the bar of my country, and in
that character in which I am arraigned
by the counsel for the prosecution. Gentlemen, in the eye of the Eternal God,
and in the view I take of myself, in my
own conscience, I can lay my hand on
my heart, and in truth pronounce myself
not guilty of the charge. With all these
painful circumstances by which I am
surrounded-with all those disadvantages
under vwhich I labour--notwithstanding
that all these combine together to present
a very formidable barrier in my path, and
thereby prevent me from doing that justice to myself and the cause I have
espoused, which they so imperatively demand-I say that, nothwithstanding these
disadvantages, I have undertaken the important task of defending myself on this
occasion; not that I suppose I possess
all the qualifications possessed by the Attorney-General, or the counsel for the
prosecution--not because I possess argumentative powers superior to others-no,
gentlemen, but because I am conscious
of my honesty and purity of motive,conscious of the uprightness of myactions,
and, above all, my perfect innocence of
the charge brought against me this day.
With these considerations before me I
am inspired with hope and confidence to
enter on my defence; believing, as I do,
that the mere force of unsophisticated
truth will supply in me the place of legal
acquirements, and that common sense
will be found more than a match for all
the interested quibbling whereby it is
sought to involve me in the meshes of the
law. Gentlemen, I feel it to be my duty
on this occasion, for a variety of reasons,
which I must state, to call upon you to
dismiss from your minds any prejudice
which class distinctions may have created,
or any erroneous opinions you may have
formed of those principles to which I am

minds any party feeling-any antipathy
that you may have against the party with
which I am inseparably connected-which
may have been caused by the influence
of a corrupt, selfish, and venal press.
Testimony has been borne to day to the
fact, and every day's transactions prove,
that no body of men whatever have been
more grossly misrepresented that the men
who hold the principles which I stand
here to advocate this day. It may be
necessary for me to call upon you to disregard some of the corrupt statements
laid down before you by the counsel for the
prosecution, and, in your capacity of
judges, holding an even balance between
the accuser and the accused, that you will
be solely guided by the facts of the case,
and by the motives that have impelled
me to seek a reform of some of those
laws, which I have, for years, believed
militated against the happiness, comfort
and prosperity of the British nation;
and that in the verdict you will
deliver, you will act honestly as in
the sight of God, the searcher of hearts,
that you will thereby prove yourselves
worthy of occupying the place of a British
jury-that you will thereby prove yourselves the impassable bulwark and protector of feeble poverty, against the encroachments of power and might-the
vigilant protectors of the rights of man
and the privileges of Englishmen. My
Lord, and Gentlemen of the jury, while
I claim your indulgence for any errors
which in the course of my defence I may
commit-while I do not wish nor intend,
my Lord, to insult you, nor, by anything
I may advance, to irritate your minds,
yet I claim the right as a man, as an
Englishman, and as a Christian, faithfully, fearlessly, and boldly to advance
those truths which I may deem necessary
for my defence. It may be necessary
for me, gentlemen, in order to enable you
to form a correct opinion of my character, conduct and motives, to give you
a brief ontline of my manner of life from
my youth up till now. By so doing I
will show what has been the tendency of
my conduct, and how the principles
which I profess must operate. Gentlemen, I may inform you that I was born
of poor, but honest and industrious parents, in an agricultural district. My

devotedly detached-to dismiss from your parents were unable to furnish me with

242

the: means of education. At an early
period of life I was taken under the
tuition of Sabbath school instruction, my
parents being too poor to furnish me with
any other means of instruction. From
that time till I was fourteen years of age
I had to work, in order to aid my
widowed mother in obtaining those means
which were necessary for my sustenance
and supoort. At that age I was bound
an.apprentice to a shoemaker, and up to
the age of twenty-one I remained with
my master, whom I afterwards left, having
served the full term of my apprenticeship.
From that time till the present I have
followed the same occupation. I have
acted in the capacity of a journeyman
shoemaker. I am going through this
narrative in order to lead you to an important point. You will find, gentlemen,
that this is no idle statement. I wish not
to trespass on your patience, or prolong
this trial by the introduction of unnecessary matters, but I have an important
motive in view by giving this outline of
my character. It will give you a view of
my motives and the general tenor of my
life. Gentlemen, in consequence of the
trade which I received at a very early
period of my life, I became the subject
of religious impressions. I became connected with a certain body of christians,
and acted in the capacity of local preacher
in connection with that body. I since became a married man, and have endeavoured to train up my children in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord.
Three of those childreh I have left behind
me with an affectionate partner. Notwithstanding my religious practices, and
strict sobriety-(for I have been a total
abstainer for the last three years), I have
had to contend with such a mass of suffering as would make your heart bleed to
hear the bare recital of it, much less
to endure it. I have been led to en-.
quire into the causes why, and wherefore, these sufferings should come upon
me, because I am convinced that there
is an intimate and inseparable connexion
between cause and effect; and that for
any suffering which an honest, industrious, and sober man has to contend
withb there must be a cause. Now, gentlemen, I have enquired of those with
whom I am acquainted as a christian,
what could be the cause of this suffering,

and I have been told by those who are
the heralds of mercy and peace, that it
was a dispensation of Providence, and
that the greater the curse in this life, the
greater and more abundant the happiness
to be enjoyed in the life to come. I began to look into the matter, and found,
after every effort I made, that effort was
vain, to enable me and my family, as the
reward of my industry, to live in comfort, and pay my way. I found others, gentlemen, in a similar position. They were
peaceable, industrious, and sober, and
their families were in a condition similar
to my own. The consequence was, that I
was led to enquire still further. I know,
my Lord, and gentlemen of the jury,
that it is a very easy matter for men to
declare that we should be content in
every state of life-that it is the will of
heaven that men should be hungry and
thirsty, and so on, and that they should
be content; but I have found, by close
investigation, that these truths are not
found in the inspired volume. It is
an easier matter for men who have their
cupboards full, and their backs well clad,
to preach up the doctrine of contentment with an empty belly, than it is for
" I," or others, enduring that, to content
themselves in that position. Now, gentlemen of the jury, having pursued my
enquiries thus far, I was led to discover
this important point,-that it was not in
any dispensation of Divine Providence
I
that this suffering had its origin.
found, by the reports of the press, the
Corn-law League, and the British House
of Commons, that there was such a mass
of suffering, distress, and privation, circulated over the face of the whole landspreading devastation and desolation over
the domestic hearth-robbing the poor
man of the comforts which he ought to
enjoy, and rendering the honest industry
of the British artizans of this once happy
land, insufficient to procure for them the
necesaries of life. Thus poverty extended to such an alarming extent among
that class of men who produced all the
clothing, and yet went naked; who built
allthehouses,aid sometimes thepalaces, of
others, and yet were themselves obliged to
congregate, bythree or four fainilies, in one
dwelling; as was the case with the poor
Spitalfield weavers, in last August twelve-.
month, who had to seek a rock for want

243
of shelter. Those who produce the food
are deprived of it, while, strange to tell,
those who neither labour, sweat, toil, nor
spin, enjoy all the comforts of life; they
inhabit splendid palaces, their tables are
furnished with all the luxuries that can
be gathered together from the four
corners of the globe, by the industry of
others-their tables are groaning beneath
these delicacies, while those who bring
them together are starving for the cornmon necessaries of life. Gentlemen, I
ash, is not this an unnatural and
contradictory state of things, and one
which is quite at variance with the foundation of all social institutions, which
have for their object the happiness of
mankind. But I am told that the rich
and the poor will always be-that some
were born to be rich, and to rule, and
that others were born to be poor, and in
subjection. I am told that this is in
accordance with the will of the Supreme
Being who superintends the affairs of
kingdoms and empires-but, gentlemen,
if time is allowed, before I have done, I
will prove that these things are at variance with the nature and character of the
Deity; with the revelation which he has
left us of his will; with the dictates of
common sense, and the strict rules of
justiceam reluctant, in..
The JUDGE :-I
deed, to interrupt a. person in the situation of a defendant; but it is my duty to
call your attention to the charge.against
you, and with which what you are now
saying has no connection whatever. The
only charge against you is, that on the
17th of August you attended a meeting
of Chartist delegates, and that at that
meeting a certain resolution was moved,
and an address voted, which resolution
and address, it is contended on the part
of the prosecution, implicate you in a
conspiracy to encourage parties violently
to stand out and not work till the Charter
became the law of the land. - That is the
only charge against you. If every defendant is to go into the whole history of
his birth, character, and education, there
will be no end to this enquiry. I would
not care what time you occupied, provided it was with any matter which had
the most remote, relevance to the points
at issue; but by your present course you
ame doing no good to yourself, or tkose
associated with you,.

SAMUEL PARKES :-Here is. the
difficulty which I am placed in-I came
to this trial without having ever had submitted to me the charge against which I
was to defend myself, or a list of the
witnesses. Consequently, I feel a great
difficulty in pleading against the charge.
The JUDGE :-Well then, I h ve
taken the pains of making a sort of ledger
for the purpose of enabling every defendant to see the harge against him.
The charge against you is, on the evidence of the man James Cartledge, who
says, " On the morning of the 17th of
August I went to Leach's shop, and there
saw Harney of Sheffield, Parhes, and
several others."-He says he saw you
there. He then states that a meeting
took place at Scholefield's chapel, and
enumerates the parties present, twentythree in all, and you are one. And then
he states this resolution about publishing,
and gives the substance of the resolution
of the delegates, which resolution was
proposed by Bairstow, and seconded by
Feargus O'Connor. That resolution was
carried, and afterwards an address was
carried. It was said at the meeting, and
not contradicted, that the minority should
be bound by the decision of the majority.
If you were there it will be for you to
contend, that the resolution and address,
when fairly considered, do not involve you
in the guilt alleged against you-that of
having conspired to induce the work
people to cease from their labour, and
obtain a change in the law by force and
violence.
The DEFENDANT:-I thank you,
my Lord, for that advice you gave me.
The JUDGE:-Pause a little, for I
may have putyou out. It is a complicatedt
charge which you have to meet. The
charge is, that you combined with others
to induce persons by force to stand out,
in order to make the Charter become the
law of the land; and the mode in which
that is brought home to you is, that you
were one of the delegates who adopted
that resolution and address. The only
way in which you can defend yourself is,.
by shewing that the resolution and address have no tendency to encourage force
or violence.
A JUROR :-My Lord, I understood
you to say, that your Lordship would lay
before us the evidence affecting each particular defendant. Now, my Lord, we

244
wish to know if it is necessary for us to
sit here, and give attention to matters entirely irrelevant such as the last two
speeches have been ?
The JUDGE:-The defendants are
not educated in these things; and, though
they do not keep to the points at issue
exactly in the way we should wish, great
latitude must be allowed to persons in
their perilous situation, who have to defend themselves against such a serious
charge without the assistance of counsel.
I first resolved not to interrupt him at
all, but what he said was so entirely wide
of the mark that I felt it my duty to interrupt him.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-My Lord, as one
of the defendants, I wish to have the
question of the juror entered on your
Lordship's notes.
The JUDGE :-I cannot; I never
heard such a question put before.
Mr. McOUBREY :-The remark of
the juror is really of so extraordinary a
nature-as it appears to me, and must to
the rest of the world -that I hope some
notice will be taken of it. It is tantamount to saying that an English jury
The JUDGE:-Well, but 1 cannot
hear you, sir. I cannot allow any observations to be made upon it. I must
say, however, that I never had such an
.application made to me before.
PARKES resumed his address'G entlemen, I will state one fact. The
reason why I took that course was thisto show, my Lord, and gentlemen, that
there is an intimate connection between
cause and effect; and that the present
alarming distress of this country, of which
distress some parties who appeared in
that witness box professed themselves
ignorant-my object was to adduce an
amount of facts which could not be controverted, contrasting the past with the
present state of England, and shewing
that the present state of distress was the
cause of discontent; and before that discontent could be removed the cause which
produced it should be removed. And
then, my Lord, I would proceed to show
that the means by which I would propose
to remove that, would be by the adoption
of those principles called the People's
Charter.The JUDGE:-I cannot hear an ad-

dress on anything of the kind.

moment you tell me that that is your
object then I cannot hear you. I am
not justified in hearing a discussion as to
what is the best mode of removing the
distress.
PARKES:-Then I will abandon
that.
The JUDGE :-Well, that is the
most sensible course. Every attention
will be given to you.
PARKES :-It appears, then, that I
am charged with conspiring with others,
by force and violence, to attempt to bring
about a change in the laN. Now, I have
ever been a man of peace, whose habits
of life have been sober and upright, and,
consequently, I would introduce that to
you as a proof that I could not be guilty
of such a conspiracy. Had I the means
of bringing witnesses here I could produce a multitude who would prove what
I stated; and that would have the effect
of weakening the charge against me.
Now, gentlemen, how could I conspire
with those individuals whom I never saw,
heard of, or knew before; and whom I
did not know at the time I was elected as
a delegate,-for I will not deny that I
was present at that conference, or that I
was at Leach's shop, and seen by parties
there. No, my Lord, I love the truth,
and would sooner sacrifice my existence
Now,
than not maintain the truth.
gentleren, how could I conspire with
those individuals whom I never saw or
heard of, and whom I did not know
would be present at that conference at the
time I was elected in the town of Sheffield ? The subject was not brought
under our notice before we arrived at
Manchester. We were ignorant of anything of the kind. The object for which
we went to Manchester was to revise the
plan of organization, settle the differences
between our leaders, and commemorate
that important event in the page of history-the memory of the late Henry
Hunt. These were the objects for which
we met, and it was shown to you by the
preceding speakers that every means
were resorted to on that occasion by
the Hunt's monument committee, for
the purpose of keeping the peace. I
saw no violence, and I know not
how such a charge can be sustained
There is no evidence
against me.
The that I have taken any forcible step to pro-

245
mote the object it is stated ,we had in into collision with the constituted authoriview. There is no evidence that I performed acts of force, orI advised acts of
force, either to one individual or another,
or the puiblic at large. There is no evidence that I have taken such a course,
and, consequently, the charge is rendered
null as against me. I understand, my
Lord, that when persons conspire together
they should know one another, and have
an acquaintance with one another; but I
have not, either by word of mouth, directly
or indirectly, any knowledge of the getting up of a conspiracy, as is stated in the
indictment, for the purpose of " by force
and violence bringing about a change in
:the law." I have held it, as far as I have
been able to ascertain from my reading,
that I have a right to advise persons to
cease work for the gaining of a certain
object, but that I have no right-nor have
I ever done it-to advise persons to a
breach of the peace-either the destruction of property or the taking away of
human life. I hold this, that if it be
right on the part of the masters to compel
their workpeople to leave work on account
of wages, it is also right on the part of
the workpeople to desistfrom labour until
the masters gave them a fair remuneration Ifor that labour. If I recollect right
in the trials at Stafford, when Cooper,
one of the defendants, asked his Lordship
whether it was right or wrong to advocate
a cessation from labour in order to obtain
the Charter, the Judge did not venture to
give an opinion on the occasion. If I
have done anytlhing ignorantly on this
occasion, be it so; but I have not done
anything,in or out of the conference, that
would implicate me in a breach of the
peace myself, or of exciting others to do
so. My Lord and gentlemen, the preceding speaker, who came from the same
town I came from, has occupied the
ground which I intended to take, but
which it is unnecessary that I should go
over again. On our return to Sheffield
from the conference we prevented the
working classes from perpetrating any
acts of vilve-we opposed every attempt to stand out either fobr wages or the
Charter on that occasion. And why?
Because, as we told the people, we could
not conceive how they could justly force
other persons out of employment. They
might by such an set bring themselves

ites but they would not prove by such
means that Chartism was right. I can
only say that by those principles which
I hold I am prepared to abide. I will
not give up my opinions, because I contend that I have a right to hold those
opinions as a Chartist, as much as either
a Whig or Tory has a right to hold his
opinions on political points. I love the
principles which I have advocated, and by
those principles I will abide. Gentlemen of
thejury, Iamnotat all daunted by thecharacters which have been brought into that
box to implicate me on this charge. As the
preceding speaker said, I would not exchange places with them; for I apprehend that the curse of a justly indignant
people will be left on their brow, whilej
shall carry in my bosom the consciousness
that I have done my duty as a peaceable
and good subject in these realms. Gentlemen of the jury, I appeal to you as
husbands, whether you have seen anything brought forward by the counsel for
the prosecution, sufficient to implicate
me in this charge ? If you conceive that
I am guilty of inciting others to a breach
of the peace-that I have contributed by
counsel, advice, or example to cause riot,
disturbance, the destruction of property,
or the taking away of life, then give your
verdict accordingly; but I have not done
these things. Conscious of my own integrity, the uprightness of my motives,
and the purity of my actions, I leave
myself in your hands, believing you will
properly exercise your legitimate right,
and come to a just and honest conclusion; and that, as there is no evidence
against me, you will acquit me of this
charge. Gentlemen, I thank you for
your patient hearing of my imperfect
remarks. If I go to prison I fear it not.
I know the way of the righteous is freI am
quently paved by persecution.
glad to take my share in the persecution
for those great principles which I profess,
and by those principles I will stand or
fall, in prison or out of it.
The JUDGE :-Is there any other
defendant to address the jury ?
OTLEY: - Gentlemen
-RICHARD
of the jury, the charge against me
is of such a trivial nature that I might
venture to leavefit with yo, with one or
two very cuisory remarks. Ishall not,
r I

246
I am sure, occupy your attention long.
I only remember my name being mentioned twice during the whole inquiry:
once by the witness Cartledge, and once
by Griffin. eartledge, it appears, did
not so much as know my name. Griffin
did nothing more than state that I was
at the meeting on the 17th of August.
If it were not for the peculiarity of the
law I would leave the evidence entirely
with you without observation ; but it
appears that having been present at the
meeting on the 17th of August, I am
liable to a charge of conspiracy; and,
therefore, it will be necessary for me to
attempt to clear myself of the charge
brought against me. It is not so much
that I fear bodily incarceration, but as a
man who has spent the whole of my life
in attempting to communicate correct instruction to the labouring classes, and
never having before been entangled in
any such situation as I am in at present,
I am so much the more concerned in repelling the accusation under which I
labour. It is the danger of hazarding
the good will of my countrymen, rather
than the fear of incarceration, that concerns me. You will remember, gentlemen, when the learned Attorney-General
opened his case that he said-and on this
subject I wish to caution you, "I will
prove so and so." I do not know whether
this is the legal manner in which impeachments are laid down, but it appears
to me to be an assumption. If the learned
gentleman had said, "I will endeavour
to prove so and so," I think it would be
perfectly right. But, you have heard the
witnesses and all they have advanced. I
am not accustomed to hear witnesses, but
I never heard such imperfect testimony
brought forward as on the present occasion. I dare say some of you have heard
of a certain fruit which grows on the
shores of the dead sea; it looks beautiful
to the eye, but when seized it crumbles
to ashes. The Attorney-General's proof
xesembled that fruit. The evidence was
very specious in its appearance, but, when
tested by being brought before this court,
it crumbled to ashes, and was of no effect.
We are charged with having attempted,
by conspiracy, to effect a change in the
constitution of our country. Great labour has been expended in endeavouring
to trace the turn-out for wages to us;

but, gentlemen, take this into consideration, that in the manufacturing districts
there are, at least, four out of every five
of the working classes, that either are
actually Chartists, or hold Chartist principles. This being the case, it is quite
impossible that that there should be a
turn-out for wages, without having a great
number of Chartists among the turn-outs.
You all know that the people are labouring under grievances, and they very naturally turn round to that which they
believe to be the greatest evil under which
they are suffering. Now, you remember
it was stated that a certain Methodist
chapel was lent to the turn-outs. I anticipated that hundreds of thousands of
the new connexion Methodists would mix
with the turn-outs, but it does not follow
frow. that that the Methodist society has
originated the turn-outs-no such thing.
Thi, is the only connexion which I can
trace at the present time between the
Chartists and the riots and tumults which
have taken place during the outbreak.
Individual members of the Chartist body,
no doubt, joined themselves to the turnouts, and thinking the Charter the best
remedy for all their grievances, recommended an agitation for its attainment.
It was in this way the question of the
Charter became mixed up with the turnout for wages. This I wish you to bear
in mind. But it has been endeavoured
to be fixed on us that we were accessories
after the fact,-That there was a conspiracy before, and that we abetted and
assisted it afterwards. From what has
been brought forward by the speakers
from the same turn-out that I came from,
it-would appear that, so far from being
accessories after the fact, we were absolutely the means of preserving, at a very
great risk, the peace of the town. There
is one expression-I don't know whether
I have reason to allude to it or not-that
the Executive Placard is entirely cast off
from us.The JUDGE :-If you allude to anything I said, that is not so. Because the
placard of the Executive iS referred to
in the address of the confe6rikie I should
not have interrupted you, but I was afraid
that you might be referring to anything
that I had said.,
OTLEY :-No, my Lord, I was going
to make an allusion to one vassage in that

247
address alluded to by the AttorneyGeneral in his opening speech. He laid
particular stress on the words, " The God
of Battle." At first sight these words,
perhaps, appeared a very dangerous expression. But if you consider only for
a few moments, you will find that when
we speak of the Deity we generally apply
some epithet to explain what we mean.
Sometimes we say the "God of mercy."
Our church service says, "Fight for us,
O Lord, for we have no other to help
us," or something to that effect. It appears to me, that the words " God of
lattle " are used in no other sense than
as an attribute of the God of Battle. It
was also stated, that some who were in
the conference were for moral, and some
for physical force. I believe, that, according to what I hear around me, I am
not correct in that statement. There is
one proof that the Chartist body had no
intention of associating themselves with
the strike for wages, tumults and riots;
and that is, that when the Chartist body
met, it appears from the evidence that
they had to take the question of the strike
into consideration. Now, if the whole
Chartist body had previously determined
to act in unison with those out on strike,
the question would not have to be mooted
afresh-the question then would be about
the propriety of going forward in the
movement already determined upon. But,
it appears, that, after the 17th of August,
there were very little riots and outbreaks
in the country. There is another observation to which I would invite your
attention before I enter on the chief body
of my defence. Taking the whole of
the evidence, from beginning to end,
it does not appear that there was one
instance of turning out the hands of a
single mill for the express purpose of
getting the Charter. There is not a single instance of any person going to a
mill-owner's and saying " We insist on
your turning out your hands in order that
we may by force make the Charter become the law of the land." This, gentlemen, is a material point. There is no
evidence of such a thing having taken
place, and you have no reason to conclude
that there was anything of the kind intended by those who turned out for wages.
I almost feel inclined to leave the matter with you without further observation

on my part because I am sure the length
of the trial and the time you have sat as
jurymen, are sufficient almost to exhaust
your patience, but, in justice to myself, I
think I should proceed with some arguments to shew that the body with which
I am connected have not conspired to
produce those riots-that we have not
been conspirators. I have thrown these
arguments into the form which I hold in
my hand, as I am not accustomed to speak
on such an occasion as the present."The defendant then commenced reading
from a thick quarto M.S. as follows:" Gentlemen of the jury, for an Englishman to defend himself in a court of law,
which is not (perhaps arising from the
imperfections of human nature) always
one of justice, is nothing new. It is an
old right exercised by Englishmen at all
times, in order that these courts may not
become, as our institutions frequently do,
corrupt. I am aware that the administration of justice may be bad, but I slight
every law, as well as the administration
of law, which does not tend to the security and prosperity of the whole, and not
of a mere section of society. But, recently, courts of law have been made, I am
sorry to say, the arenas of political partizans. Men have been elevated to the
bench, I fear, not for the administration
of justice, but to terrify the oppressed
millions into submission to pallid want,
and unjust, because unequal taxation.
Indeed the laws of England are at present in opposition to the spirit of the
constitution-they are directly against the
the interests of the labourer. He is to be
governed, or have his property taken from
him, for the words are synonymous.
Others are exempt from government and
law. The labourer produces wealth;
others seize and enjoy it. He feels the
gnawings of hunger, and is compelled by
the relentless hand of despotic power to
hear his children ask for bread without
having the ability to supply them. From
these causes I would observe, that by the
cruelty of the law he is driven to despair
and madness, until at last he bursts every
restraint, and convulses society to its
centre, till neither property, social institutions, the sacred edifices of religion,
nor even life itself is safe-till like the
storm, or the whirlwind, he bears down
every opposition in tremendous and fear.

248
tul"--[Here Otley was interrupted by

OTLEY then proceeded to read the

sereral of the other defendants around placard calling the meeting:him, who suggested that the course he
s taking was highly prejudicial to their
etMise as well as his own.] From the advice I have just received, as well as from
:everal hints thrown out in the course of
myr address, it would be best, perhaps to
~dopt the first resolution with respect to
my situation as implicated in this charge,
and not go into any elaborate defence.
I will not, therefore, trespass on your patience. I hope you will take that into
consideration, and not consider me the
less innocent of the charge because I have,
at the suggestion of friends around me,
abandoned my defence-a defence got up
with some pains, and in which I had
drawn evidence from eminent men, and
great authorities-Blackstone, Coke, and
Fortescue-as well as the usages of our
country in ancient times-to demonstrate
that what we seek is not a change of the
constitution, but a reformation. Because
I have abandoned this defence, from the
considerations which I have just quoted,
I hope you will not allow me on that account to suffer any inconvenience, or
consider me less entitled to an acquittal
at your hands.
RICHARD PILLING then rose to
address the Court, but was interrupted

by
The DEFENDANT OTLEY, who
said :-May I beg one moment's indulgence in order to show that I had no
connection with the riots or tumults., I
will just read a placard and letter from
the master cutler in Sheffield, who is
similar to a mayor, in our town. I wish
to have his testimony to show the way in
which the meeting was called to elect the
delegates for Manchester. I may also
state that I was only two days from Sheffield. One of the witnesses stated that
we skulked out of Manchester. I wish
to disabuse your minds of that impression. I slept at the Temperance Hall
the night I entered Manchester. I walled
up and down the streets of Manchester
the following morning for about an hour,
and I took a place at the railway in my
own name when returning. I should
have brought forward this before, and I
trust you will excuse me f6r rising to do
so now.

The JU D

G E

"PUBLIC MEETING.
TO THE MASTER CUTLER."-

The JUDGE :-This is the placard
calling the meeting at Sheffield ?
OTLEY :-Yes, my Lord; to elect
delegates to attend this meeting on the
17th." We, the undersigned inhabitant householders
of the Borough of Sheffield, do hereby request you
to call a public meeting to be holden in front of
the Corn Exchange, on Tuesday, July the 26th,
1842, at half-past eight o'clock in the evening;
to elect delegates to attend a conference of the
working classes to assemble in Manchester; and
further to take into consideration the best means
of assisting a committee in erecting a monument to the memory of the late Henry Hunt,
Esq."

I have no occasion to mention it further.
The Master Cutler declined calling the
meeting. He was called upon when I
was in custody in Manchester, and having lost the original document of the
requisition he sent me this letterSir,-I have been this day applied to for the
document you waited upon me with, on or about
the 22nd of July last, which was numerously
signed, requesting that I,
asMasterCutler, would
call a public meeting to elect delegates to attend
a conference! of the working men. That document being mislaid, I write these lines to certify
that such requisition was presented; and though
I declined to call the meeting, I should-regret
exceedingly if the absence of the document in
question should operate against you in your present situation."

The date of the meeting is the 26th of
July, 1842. The placard I have givenr.
you.

RICHARD PILLING :-My Lord,
and gentlemen of the jury, I am come
quite unprepared with any defence;
neither do I intend to take up much of
your time. I have took no notes of
what the witnesses have sworn against
me; but they have sworn hard-some
of them. I can prove, to demonstration,
thatMr.Gregory, the prosecutor's attorney,
has sent home some of the first witnesses
and paid them off, because they would
not swear more against us than they did.
Gentlemen of the jury, it is stated by
one of the witnesses, that :I was the
,
father of this great movement--the father
:You are quite right, of this outbreak; if so, then punish me,

249
and let all the rest go free. But I say
it is not me that is the father of this
movement; but that house. Our addresses have been laid before that house,
and theyhave not redressed ourgrievances;
and from there, and there alone, the
cause comes. The first witness that
spoke to me was a man of the name of
Wilcox. He spoke of being at a meeting where he saw a placard headed" Behold the reckoning day is nigh."
The prosecution put that in as evidence,
but they did not put in the substance of
the placard. Now, I make application
to the Court either to make them put in
the substance of that placard as evidence,
or to return it to me for my defence.
They have it, and why should they not
produce it ? But why mention the heading of the placard ? Now, it is common,
in the manufacturing districts, to put
something striking on as a heading for a
placard, in order to get the work-people
to look at it.

cursed system-it is a system, which,
above all systems, will bring this country
to ruin if it is not altered. I have read
some of the speeches by the late Mr.
Sadler, and I have read many letters of
that noble king of Yorkshire-Richard
Oastler-I have read many of his letters,
and very shortly I became an advocate of
the Ten Hours' Bill. I continued to advocate the Ten Hours' Bill up to the present day, and as long as I have a day to
live, so long will I advocate the Ten
Hours' Bill. After working in the factory
seven years, a reduction began to creep
in, one. way or the other. I was a resident at Stockport. A reduction crept
in on one side and another. There were
some masters always who wanted to
give less wages than others. Seeing
this to be an evil, and knowing it
to be injurious to the master, the owner
of cottage-property, and the publican,knowing that all depended on the wages

The working people rise of the working man, I became an oppo-

early and work late, and have no time to
spare. They have, some of them, miles
to walk to their meals, and three pence is
taken from each of them if they are not
back to their work in time. This being
the case we put anything on the head of
placards, or bills, merely to cause an
attraction that they may be read. Gentlemen, I am somewhere about fortythree years of age. I was asked last
night if I were not sixty. But if I had
as good usage as others, instead of looking like a man of sixty, I should look
something like a man of thirty-six. I
have gone to be a hand-loom weaver,
when I was about ten years of age-in
1810. The first week I ever worked in
my life, I earned sixteen shillings aI followed
week by the hand-loom.
that occupation till 1840. Then I was
the father of a family-a wife and three
could only earnchildren. In 1840 If
indeed the last week I worked, and I
worked hard, I could only earn six and
six pence; but I should do that or become a pauper. I should go to the factory, which I detested to the bottom of
my heart, and work for six and six pence
a-week or become a pauper. But although
I detested the factory system, yet, sooner
than become a pauper on the parish I
submitted. I was not long in the factory
until I saw the evil workings of the ac-

nent to the reduction of wages to the
bottom of my soul; and as long as I live
I shall continue to keep up the wages of
labour, to the utmost of my power. For
taking that part in Stockport, and being
the means of preventing many reductions,
the masters combined all as one man
against me, and neither me nor my children could get a day's employment. In
1840, there was a great turn-out in
Stockport, in which turn-out I took a
conspicuous part. We were out eight
weeks. We were up every morning from
five to six o'clock. Upwards of 6000
power-loom weavers were engaged in that
turn-out. We had our processions. We
went to Ashton, Hyde, and Duckinfield
in procession. We had our processions
in Manchester, and all over the country,
and we were not interfered with. No one
meddled with us - no one insulted us.
We were never told, at this time, that we
were doing that which was wrong. Considering, from the act of parliament that
was passed when the combination laws
were repealed in 1825, that I had a right
to do so; I did believe, as an Englishman,
conseand factory operative that, min
quence of that act, I had aright todo
all that ever lay in my power to keep up
wages. In 1840 the master manufacturers, to the number of about forty, had
a meeting, and they conspired together--

250
if there is conspiracy on the one side
there is conspiracy on the other-and
they gave us notice for a reduction of
one penny a cut. Some people think a
penny is a small reduction, but it amounts
to five weeks' wages in the course of the
Year. It is 2s. 6d. a week. Thus by that
reduction, they were robbing every operative of five weeks' wages. I knew that
Stockport would be injured in consequence of that reduction. I knew the
result would be that the master-manufacturers themselves would be injured by it.
My prophecy is fulfilled. One-half of
them is broken, and the other half is insolvent. When they gave notice of that
reduction, they said-" Blackburn, Preston, and all the manufacturing districts
are paying less than us, and we shall all
break unless we come down to the Blackburn prices." What was the result?
Hyde, Ashton, Stalybridge, Bolton, Wi.
gan, Warrington, Preston, Blackburn
reduced. In another year all the towns
in the manufacturing distriets reduced
again. Not content with that reduction,
about twelve months after they took off
another penny a cut, besides taking two
shillings off the Throstle spinners who
had only nine shillings a week, and
eighteen-pence off the card spinners, who
had only eight shillings a week, and so
on. When they took the other penny a
cut off, I pulled all the hands out, and
wewent round again to all the manufacturing districts, and brought things to a level
again. The manufacturers of Stockport
met again, and said-" we cannot compete with Blackburn and Preston, and we
must reduce again,"-and this is the way
they will go on until at length they reduce so low that we shall all become
paupers. Gentlemen, I went to Ashton.
Myself and my two sons were then working at the mills for twelve-pence halfpenny a cut. Our work was thirty cuts
a week - which makes £1 11s. 3d.
When Stockport reduced, my employer
took off a penny a cut; then he took off
a half.-penny a cut.-I am not blaming
him; he was only following others. If
one master reduces, the others must reduce aso. They all have to meet in one
market, and if one man at a certain price
has a penny profit, and the other only a
farthing, he who has only the farthing
will break. I was in very poor circum-

stances then, having a wife and seven
children to support; and only three of
us earning wages, as I told you. My
wages then (two years and a half ago)
was £1 1s. 3d. He then took a penny
off for every cut. I had to pay three
shillings for rent, one shilling and sixpence for fire, sixpence for soap, and two
shillings for clothing, leaving, after reckoning all up, about one pound a week for
provisions. When he took this penny off
it caused a reduction in my wages of
two shillings and sixpence. Shortly after
he took off a half-penny a cut, which was
a reduction of one shilling and threeFifteen months
pence a week more.
since they took another penny off; then
they took a farthing a cut off, and at the
mill we worked at we turned out against
the farthing. Three men who were out
on that strike were turned off when the
hands returned to their work. I am not
ashamed to state that I did all I could
along with other individuals to prevent
We accomplished that,
the reduction.
and there never was any good done either
to operatives, masters, or owners of cottage property but some one suffered :
and if I am found guilty of doing
my best to promote the interests of those
whom I love, I shall still rejoice in considering that my exertions have prevented
a reduction which would have been inju.
rious to so many. Peace, law, and order was our motto, and we acted up to
that motto. In Ashton-under-Lyne one
pennyworth of damage was not done to
property, although we were out for six
weeks. My Lord, and gentlemen of the
jury, it was then a hard case for me to
support myself and family. My eldest
son but one, who was sixteen years of
age, had fallen into a consumption last
Easter and left his work. We were then
reduced to 91d a cut, whic0 brought our
earnings down to something like sixteen
shillings a week. That is all I had to
live on, with my nine in family, three
shillings a week going out of that for rent,
and a sick son lying helpless before me.
I have gone home and seen that son[here Pilling was moved to tears, and
unable to proceed for some time.] I have
seen that son lying on a sick bed and
dying pillow, and having nothing to eat
but potatoes and salt. Now, gentlemen
of the jury, just put yourselves in this si-

251
tuation, and ask yourselves whether seeing a sick son tat had worked twelve
hours a day for six years, in a factorya good and industrious lad-I ask you,
gentlemen, how you would feel if you
saw your son lying on a sick bed and
dying pillow, with neither medical aid,
nor any of the common necessaries of
life ?-Yea, I recollect some one going
to a gentleman's house in Ashton, to ask
for a bottle of wine for him; and it was
said, " Oh, he is a chartist, he must have
none." [Great sensation in court]. Oh,
such usage from the rich will never convince the chartists that they are wrong.
Gentlemen, my son died before the con.
mencement of the strike; and such was
the feeling of the people of Asht2a towards my family, that they collected £4
towards Uabihuial. ~~,tilemen of the
jury, it was under these circumstances
that I happened to call at Stockport-excited I will admit by the loss of my son,
together with a reduction of 25 per cent;
for I will acknowledge and conftss before
you, gentlemen of the jury, that before I
would have lived to submit to another reduction of 25 per cent., I would have terminated my own existence. That was
my intention. Let us now come to the
facts of the case. I will tell you what
was the origin of the strike. Although
three men were discharged for taking an
active part in the turn-out, my master did
not discharge me on account of the sickness of my son; and I believe my master did not discharge those men, but some
The
of the minions-the managers.
bellman was sent round to create sympathy for these men. One man had a wife
and four children, and nothing to depend
on; another had a wife and two children,
and nothing to depend on; and a third
was a single man. Mr. Rayners of Ashton had given notice, within a day or
two of that time, that he would reduce 25
per cent. So indignant were the feelings
of the people of Ashton and the surrounding district, not only the chartists, but all
sorts assembled; a room that would hold
a thousand people was crammed to suffocation, and the whole voice of the meeting was, that it was of no use trying to
get up a subscription for others, but to
give up. And that was just the way the
strike began; it rose in a minute from one
end of the room to the other; whigs, to-

ries, hartists, sham radicals, and all sorts
Then it was thought proper that a committee should be appointed, and that committee issued the placard headed " The
day-of reckoning draweth nigh ;" but, if
the Attorney-General had read the tail:as
well as the head of that placard, it would
have been seen that not one single word
of political matter was in it. Lot him put
in the tail-let it be brought forward, and
you will see that there is nothing political
in it. That heading "Behold the reckoning day draweth nigh," was put on it to
cause an-attraction; and, if my memory
does not deceive me, I really believe that
Wilcox was the man who suggested that
heading, and not me as he stated. Buthe
is craftier than I am. He went to Sir
James Graham, or wrote a letter to him,
and now he is put into the witness-box
against me. That placard stated, that if
another reduction was offered we would
cease working till we had a fair day's
wages for a fair day's work, but the
Charter was never mentioned. That addition was put to it by the witness. Another resolution was, that the reduction of
wages was injurious to all classes of the
community. This was done at a meeting
where there were 15,000 present, and the
entire population is only 25,000. Nearly
all Ashton was there; shopkeepers, publicans, spinners, lawyers, (no, not lawyers, they live on the wages of others,
and they had no business there), all were
at that meeting. Nearly every operative
in the neighbourhood was there. All
held up their hands in favour of the
resolutions. The speeches were chiefly
shewing the evil tendency of machinery,
without any protection for labour. Gentlemen of the jury, if I were to tell you
what I know of my own knowledge of
individual masters you would be astonished. One master, at Stockport, Wiho,
ten years ago, had fifty men employed
at 11. 5s. a week, has now the same
quantity of work done by ten men at 11.
a week. I know another case where the
work is all done by self-acting mules.
I know a place where forty dressers were
once employed, and the work is all done
now by machinery. Well, we had a
turn-out to prevent a reduction; and when
Rayner saw the spirit of the meeting he
wvithdrew his rtduction. A meeting was
then called at Stalyltridge, and every one

252
ings placards were issued by these com.
mittees, of which I will read one; and
this will show you that we did every
thing plainly, and above board-every
thing that we considered strictly legal:" THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS
THE VOICE OF GOD.
A meeting was also held at
"To the masters and tradesmen of Ashton.

withdrew the reduction except Bayley.
Now, if there is one man who ought to
stand here as a defendant that is the man.
If he had withdrawn the reduction there
would have been no strike; the people
would have settled down and enjoyed a
glorious triumph in preventing the re-

duction.
Hyde; and the people of Hyde declared under-Lyne, and its vicinities.-We, the operaof
that if the masters attempted to make tives Ashton-under-Lyne, in public meeting
you
it
another reduction they (the working assembled, feel our duty to tell thus pubpeople) would give over. At Droylsden licly, that such are our sufferings in consequence
the same. This is the history of the turn- of low wages, and numerous other things, that
out. I would say to the jury and the we can no longer tamely submit to it. We,
prices
people assembled here, that if it had not therefore, wish you to give us the same
been for the late struggle I firmly believe that we received in the year 1840. If you say
thousands would have been starved to you cannot pay it, it is time, you, one and all,
out
death, for the cry of the manufacturers hold a general consultation, to find the reareduce their wages; the sons why the labourer cannot be sufficiently rewas, " we will
operatives are running against each other munerated for his labour; forit is adivine maxim
hire. We solicit
and we may do as we please." That was that the labourer is worthy of his
feeling by which they were ac- the co-operation of all classes of society to prethe
tuated; but I am not one of those who vent the total annihilation of our commerce, and
empire. The following
would, like the Irish, live on the lum- the ruin of the British
ers-nor woul I be like a degraded is the list of prices requested, and the same as we
pers--nor would I be, like a degraded received in 1840 :-Spinners, 46 dozens, weft
IRussian serf, sold with the land. I want 2s. 2d.; twist, 3s. per thousand hanks, 27 doz-

to see the people here well educated; and ens; twist 3s. 7d. do. All sizeswheels to
of
if a man has the means in his pocket he be paid in proportion. Rovers, the same as
overs, the reed, as
inproportion. 28 inches, 72 same 29
and if be paid
will people are oce well informed, then i1840. Weavers, 22 picks,
the get his children educated;
the people are once well informed, then yards, ls. 4d. per cut; 19do. 27 do. 72 do.29 do.
the Charter must be the law of the land. is. ; do. 17 do.; 27 do.; 66 do.; 29 do.;
lyd.

My Lord, and gentlemen of the jury,
I have only this to say, that whatever
evidence has been given against me, you
will make great allowance for the situation in which I was placed, in respect
to my family, and the operatives with
whom I worked. I have seen in the
factory in which I have worked, wives
and mothers working from morning till
night with only one meal; and a child
brought to suck at them twice a day. I
have seen fathers of families coming in
the morning and working till night, and
having only one meal, or two at the
farthest extent. This was the state we
were in at the time of the strike. In
consequence of working short time, at
low wages; with little food, with oppression upon oppression, distress upon distress, the people were at length nearly
exhausted, both in strength, circum-

ls.
Od.; do. 9-8ths of the same reeds to be paid
inproportion-Dressers, 7-8ths, 72 reed, 36's,
first 21d. percut, and allother reeds in proportion
for numbers of ends and twists.-Strippers, and
Grinders, £1 per week. Twiners, 100's, 71d.
per lb. on 270 spindles, 58's, weft, ls. 4d. per
thousand; do. 33's twist, Is. 2d. do.; twisters
in 7-8, 72 reed, 51d. per beam; 9-8, 72yards do.
38 inches, 7d. per do.; 9-8, 72 do.; 42 do. 8d.
per do. Piecers, winders, reelers, frame tenters,
and all others to receive the same wages they received in 1840. In asking for these, we ask for
nothing unreasonable, we hope you shall see at
once the justice of our claim."
After some further remarks the placard
goes on to say"The government of our country seem determined not to do anything that will remove the
take
all-pervading ruin that will place. They
affect to believe that the distress of the people,
and the embarrassment of the middle classes, are

represented. Let
stances, and patience; and they were not so great as they have been
account:"glad, as it were, that the time was come the shoipkeepers read the following

The placard then goes on to state that
when there was some resistance offered
What was the the interests of the shopkeepers and the
manufacturers.
to the
result of this ? After these public meet- working classes are identical, and shows

253
that, in consequence of the reductioni of
wages, £140,400 were taken out of the
pockets of the work-people, and the tills of
the shopkeepers during 11 months. This,
Gentlemen, is the terrible placard of
which the prosecutor put in the head,
but not the tail. This was sent in'parcels to the prosecutor's attorney, and
now he has not one of them to put in
evidence. But if the Charter was on
the top of them, you would have hundreds of them.
" Whether we succeed or not, we shall have
the satisfaction of knowing that we have asked
for nothing unreasonable or unjust. We want a
uniform price for the whole of the manufacturing
districts; and it is the interest of masters to
have it, in order that one man cannot undersell
another in the market. Much is said about over
production, and about the market being glutted.
In order to obviate the past, let us all work ten
hours per day, and we are sure it will lessen the

amount of goods in the market. The home consumption will also be considerably increased by
increasing the wages of the labourer.
" The operatives of Ashton-under-Lyne,
" John Williamson, Printer."

Gentlemen of the jury, after sending
out that placard the delegates assembled,
and sent deputations to all the masters,
requesting them to co-operate with us, in
reducing the hours of labour to ten hours
a day; we wished them to adopt such
rules, that one house would have no advantages which would enable them to
undersell another. We said:-" Let honour and principle be establishedlet all the masters work ten hours a day, and let
there be an end to all reductions and turn-outs."

Some of the masters said, they were
willing to do so, but others objected.
[The jury requested, and were allowed,
permission to retire for five minutes.
On the return of the jury Pilling proceeded]:-My Lord, and gentlemen of
the jury, I shall not occupy much more
of your time. I was stating, that on the
20th of August, we had a delegate meeting, from all trades in the mianufacturing
districts, for the purpose of drawing up a
list of prices to submit to the masters.
This shows at once that the public mind
was settled down in a firm resolution to
have the wages advanced. We put an
advertisement in the .Manchester Guardian. We endeavoured to find out the
secretary of the Manchester maiufac-

turers to ascertain from him if they
would consent to reduce the hours of
labour to ten hours a-day, and give the
wages of 1840. I was one of a deputation that went to Sir Thomas Potter to
get him to mediate between us and the
masters, and obtain for us the wages of
1840. He told us he was not a manufacturer, and should be looked upon with
suspicion if he interfered; and desired us
to go to Mr. Brotherton. We went to
his house, but that gentleman was not
at home. After the advertisement appeared in the M.anchester Guardian, inviting the masters to meet us, we came to
this conclusion, that we would publish
the resolution we had come to, and a list
of prices. Gentlemen of the jury, I have
not depicted to you so much as I could of
the factory system. Many of you are acquainted with it. I know an instance in
Stockport where one master, the present
mayor of Stockport - Mr. Orrell, employs 600 hands, and he will not allow
one man to work within the mill. I have
seen husbands carrying their children to
the mill to be suckled by their mothers,
and carrying their wives' breakfasts to
them. I have seen this in Bradshaw's
mills, where females are employed instead of men. I was one of a deputation
to Mr. Orrell, and also to Mr. Bradshaw, requesting them to allow men to
work at their mills, but they refused.
One female requested most earnestly that
her husband might be allowed to go and
work alongside of her, but she was refused. These are a few instances that
came within my own knowledge; but
there are thousands of others. In consequence of females being employed
under these circumstances, the overlookers, managers, and other tools, take
most scandalous liberties with them.
If I were to detail to you what I have
seen myself done by men of that description you would not be astonished that
fathers and husbands should have a feeling for factory operatives-you would not
be astonished at any one endeavouring
to reform the system. This is what I
have been doing; this is my offence. I
will now conclude by reading this last
placard, and the resolution to which we
came "To the Operatives and the Public generally:We the delegates representing the cotton trade,

204
Ihaving met in Manchester, on Thursday, Sep,
tember 1st, 1842, take the first opportunity of
laying our opinions before you concerning the
conduct of the masters, whom we invited to
meet us, for the purpose of arranging the existing
differences. They having declined to do so, we
consider such conduct most unjustifiable; it
being calculated to drive the working people to
starvation and crime, and the shopkeepers to
bankruptcy and ruin. Fellow workmen, we
therefore call on you strenuously to adhere to the
following resolution agreed to by our represen-

though the government and prosecutors,
I am sorry to say, are not progressing,
the people are. Suppose, gentlemen of
the jury, you were obliged to subsist on
the paltry pittance given to us in the shape
of wages, and had a ife and six helpless
children, five of them under thirteen years
of age, to support, how would you feel ?
Though you were to confine me to a
d
have a nervoul not submit to it. I
wife I love and cherish, and
that
wife--a
I have done everything that I could in

tatives, as the means of redeeming you from your the way of resisting reductions in wages,

present degraded state."
Then follows the resolution, in which
the workmen declared their intention not
to resume work till they got the prices
they left off at-that is, the prices of
1840. Gentlemen, if there is any illegality in that, I acknowledge I am guilty.
There is no evidence that I was at the
stopping of any mills, but merely that I
was speaking at public meetings, as I
have frequently done before in Stockport
and elsewhere. I firmly believe that we
have a right to send delegates to get subscriptions for the purpose of relieving
those out of work. As I never came under any prosecution for these things before, I thought I had a right to do the
same things still. But the law of conspiracy, it appears, spreads its net so that
no one can tell who is safe. The manner
in which the prosecution has scraped
things together, shews that they had a
bad case. I once said to a lawyer'"
You lawyers contrive to make up a
good deal of things out of nothing,"
and he said, " In order to make up
a good thing out of nothing, I take
care to get together a good deal and
then I am sure to make up something." So they have brought together
a great mass of stuff against us in order,
at all hazards, to ensure a conviction. I
hope, as Englishmen, you will feel for
us, and acting conscientiously, do your
duty as Englishmen have done before.
When was there such a prosecution as
the present? When were fifty-nine men
prosecuted in one indictment, for a strike,
There is no such thing in the annals of
.history. There never was a government
prosecution for a turn-out for wages, like
the present. Instead of progressing, the
government are going backward. But,

that I might keep her and my children
from the workhouse, for I detest parish
relief. It is wages I want. I want to be
independent of every man, and that is the
principle of every honest Englishmen;
and I hope it is the principle of every
man in this court. Suppose gentlemen,
that any of you had a wife and six helpless children depending on your exertions
for support; and suppose that one reduction after another took place in your
wages, till the remaining portion scarcely
proved sufficient to provide you with the
common necessaries of life; and that on
Saturday night your sorrowful wife had
nothing for her family-that she saw her
dear children dying almost for want of
the common necessaries of life; and that
you had a son as I had, on a dying bed
without medical aid, or anything to
subsist on, how would you feel ? I
was twenty years among the handloom
weavers, and ten years in a factory, and I
unhesitatiiigly say, that during the whole
course of that time I worked twelve hours
a day with the exception of twelve months
that the masters of Stockport would not
employ me; and the longer and harder
I have worked the poorer and poorer I
have become every year, until, at last, I
am nearly exhausted. If the masters had
taken off another 25 per cent., I would
put an end to my existence sooner than
kill myself working twelve hours a day
in a cotton factory, and eating potatoes
and salt. Gentlemen of the jury, I now
leave my case in your hands. Whatever
it may have been with others it has been
a wage question with me. And I do say
Mr. O'Connor has made it a charthat if
tist question, he has done wonders to
make it extend throughEngland, Ireland,
and Scotland. But it was always a wage

255
question, and ten hours bill with me. I
have advocated the keeping up of wages
for a long time, and I shall do so till the
end of my days. And, if confined within the
walls of a dungeon,knowing thatas an individualIhave done my duty; knowingthatI
have been one of the great spokes in the
wheel by which that last reduction of
wages was prevented-knowing that by
means of that turn-out thousands and tens
of thousands have eaten the bread which
they would not have eaten if the turn-out
had not taken place, I am satisfied, whatever may be the result. With these observations I shall leave you to perform
your duty. I have no doubt but you
will, by your verdict, allow me to return
to my loving wife, and loving children,
and to my employment. My master has
told me, coming away, that if I return
again he will not take advantage of me
as long as I am a good workman. With
these considerations I leave my case with
you, hoping and trusting you will not rely
on the garbled statements given by the
witnesses about the turn-out, but on the
honesty and sincerity of the indvidual
before you. And, now, Gentlemen of
the jury, you have the case before you;
the masters conspired to kill me, and I
combined to keep myself alive.
GEORGE JOHNSON:-I do not
intend to occupy much of your time. I
do say that I felt my mind wounded when
I heard an expression of discontent from
one of the jurors. I hope, however, he
will bear in mind that the Crown has occupied a great deal of time in bringing
forward witnesses obtained at a great deal
of expense and labour, to make out a
case for the prosecution. I hope you
will therefore continue to give that attention you have hitherto shown us, while
we spend a very little more time in defending ourselves from what I consider to be a
very unjust accusation. What I represent as an unjust accusation is one of the
most solemn matters, perhaps, everbrouight
before a British audience for consideration. The event of which we are the
representatives was certainly an event
which struck terror-not merely into the
legislature-not merely into the hearts of
those who have been referred to as enjoying so much of the good things of this
life, but which must have struck terror
into the hearts of almost every honest

hearted cottager in the country in which
it happened-an event which no man
could properly understand-an event with
which most men were puzzled, and with
which no one knew how to grapple-an
event, which, bad it not been for the good
heartedness of all parties in politics-men
of all prejudices, and all opinions in theology, had it not been for the good heartedness of those who dwelt on the very
spot, it might have proved an event which
would have done great injury to the institutions of this country. It was certainly, gentlemen, an event so sudden,
and unconcocted by either one party of
men, or the other, that all parties were
brought to confess that they scarcely knew
how to act, though act they must; whether their acting would prove legal or otherwise; whether it would expose them to
trouble bysubjecting them to an accusation
on the part of the government-interfere
they must, or the country would be involved in dreadful anarchy. In the assemblies to which the several witnesses
have deposed, there was not a feeling of
rancour-not a feeling of ill-will-not a
feeling of revenge exhibited. This was
strange, when you consider that the
turn-outs had so many things written
upon their recollections which they could
not under any circumstances forget. So
much ill-usage and personal violence
were practised upon them in different
shapes by the manufacturers of these
districts, that the absence of ill-feeling
at all those meetings of turn-outs is most
unaccountable. Shopkeepers, tradesmen,
and turn-outs, seemed willing to lose all
their prejudices-to bury them-to destroy them- to let them sink into oblivion-they seemed, all at once, to have
lost all party feelings as politicians, and
prejudices as religionists.
The JUDGE :-There is no evidence
affecting Johnson, except that given by
the first witness.
JOHNSON :-I merely wish to make
a few observations.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-I think
there is, my Lord.
The JUDGE:-Does anybody speak
to you except Haigh ?
JOHNSON:-Yes; one witness said
they were going to throw me out of a
cart because I dwelt on the wage question.

256
The JUDGE :-Don't let me interrupt you.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:- The
Attorney-General is not here this moment, my Lord, but I am quite sure, that,
if your Lordship thinks the evidence
-against Johnson is not so strong as
against the others, he would not press it.
The JUDGE:-I do not wish to say
that.
JOHNSON:-I am spoken to by
Haigh, and Brierley, of Stalybridge, my
Lord.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He was
in the chair at a meeting there.
The JUDGE:-Yes, and they had
like to have thrown him out of the cart.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:--I am
quite sure if your Lordship has any impression on the point, that I would be
only acting in the spirit of the AttorneyGeneral to consent on his part to an
acquittal of Johnson.
The jury, by the direction of his Lordship, acquitted Johnson.
JOHNSON:-Then I suppose I shall
have no opportunity of saying any more.
(Laughter.) I am much ',bliged, my
Lord and Gentlemen of thr ury.
THOMAS STORAH:- My Lord,
and Gentlemen of the jury, in appearing
before you this day to offer a defence on
the evidence adduced against me, I feel
convinced that I shall not give you much
trouble. The whole of' the evidence
adduced against me, is,
that I attended a
meeting and spoke to a resolution. This
is all I know that has been given in
evidence against me in this Court. The
whole tenor of my speech at that meeting was-advising the people to be careful how they went on. And, remember,
this meeting was held on the 2nd or 3rd
of August, before the turn-out commenced. The meeting was held at
Duckinfield. Brierley deposed that I
made a speech, but he never tells the
He
jury the tenor of that speech.
merely says I was there. I believe,
he says, I spoke a resolution. I do not
understand the meaning of " spoke a
resolution." There is something in it
which, according to my idea, cannot be
unravelled, I advised the people not to
strike for wages unless they thought it
likely that they could obtain those wages.
This is all I have to say on this occa-

sion, except that I have been indicted,
with fifty-eight brethren, because I happen to be one of those individuals who
professed Chartism. I have lived eight
or nine years in the town of Ashtonunder-Lyne. In that town I have maintained my position as a straight-forward,
honest, industrious operative. I have
been a severe opponent of the manufacturers, or, in other words, of the Anticorn Law League, and, I believe, that is
the sole reason why I am indicted here
for conspiracy. For opposing the large
mill-owners of Ashton, they have determined to prosecute me, and that is the sole
reason why I am brought here. I believe
I have a right to hold what political
opinions I think proper. Every individual in the realm has a perfect right to
think for himself, as has been observed
by a brother conspirator. I do not care
much for going within the walls of
this or any other prison for what I have
done, because I believe I am innocent of
any crime whatever. I have advocated
the right of the people to enjoy political
freedom, because, in the ancient laws of
the country-if we examine the history
of the country-we will find that in the
reign of king Ethelred, univeral suffrage
was the law of the land. I will not occupy more of your time, as my friends
here have urged the necessity of not detamining you. You have been detained
from home sadly too long, and, on that
account, I will not detain you any longer.
you decide according to
I believe that if
the evidence given, you cannot do justice
to me unless you acquit me.
JOHN ALLINSON, next rose to address the jury.
there
The JUDGE :-Whatevidence is
against him ?
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He attended the meeting of trades delegates, and
also the conference meeting. As the Attorney-General is not here, I cannot undertake to say any thing respecting Allinson.
.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL haying entered the court,
The JUDGE asked :-What evidence
is there against Allinson ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
At present I am not aware of any except
that he was one of the conference dele.
gates at Scholefield's.

257
The JUDGE:-Do you mean the defend my actions, my character, and my
honour from the distortions sought to be
trades' delegates ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - given to the one, and the attempts made
No, my Lord, the conference at Schole- to blast and sully the other, I have undertaken my own defence, contrary, perfield's.
The JUDGE :-The names I have got haps, to the usual course on these occadown as having been at that meeting are, sions, and also in opposition to the
M'Douall, the two Leachs, M'Cartney, counsel of friends, from various, to me
Otley, Harney, Cooper, Hoyle, Brooks, important, reasons; first, that I would
Norman, Morrison, Arran, and Skeving- despise owing my acquittal to the mere
ton. There is the evidence of a police- introduction on my behalf of legal and
man from Stockport, of his attending a technical quibbling, and caring not so
meeting after the business was over on much for the consequences in my own
the 17th. If there is any doubt about person as 1 am desirous of guarding and
it we will go on. Perhaps some other defending to the utmost of my power
defendant will address the jury in the and humble abilities those principles
He was at a meeting at which I have held for years, and which,
meantime.
Stalybridge, and was one of the most until I am convinced of their fallacy, I
active in the struggle for wages. He purpose maintaining. Also finding my
told the Stalybridge people that the reputation and character, which I prize
struggle was now over, and that they above all earthly things, attacked; smartmight go to their work, and endeavour by ing under the underserved censure of the
Attorney-General-smarting under the
every means to get the Charter.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-That is undeserved censure with which the world,
the only evidence against him, unless he perhaps, may be too ready to visit me,
in consequence of the position which he,
was one of the delegates.
BERNARD M'CARTNEY: - My with all his legal acquirements, backed
Lord, I had contemplated remaining up by his high, commanding, and captialmost, or as nearly as possible, till the vating eloquence, has endeavoured to
last of the defendants, who intend to ad- place me in, from this censure, gentledress you, had spoken; but, although ar- men, Idesire to rescue myself, and in your
raigned in your presence to day as a cold- presence to day not to exhibit anything
blooded conspirator, I confess my blood approximating to repeutance-disdaining
runs not cold enough to sit here, and with to stoop to anything that can be consicallous indifference hear such details of dered subterfuge, I propose defending
woe, misery, and destitution, as have every action of my past life; I propose
been given in the various speeches ad- defending and substantiating everything
dressed to you. For this reason, and in connection with the late disturbances;
this reason alone, I am desirous of ac- I propose to prove to the world, gentlequitting myself of that duty I owe myself, men, that I have been guided through
and retiring, during the remainder of the the course I have' taken by the most hospeeches, for I am wholly inadequate to nest and heartfelt conviction of the rectithe task of sitting here and listening to tude of my conduct, backed up by the
such details of misery. I trust, gentlemen, consciousness of the duty I owe to mythat the utmost indulgence of which your self and my country, as well as the
natures are capable, or which is consistent duty I owe to the laws, which, up
with the forms of this court, will be given to this moment I have never been
to me on this occasion. Unskilled and charged with violating-I have never
untutored as I am in all the forms and been charged with violating any of the
technicalities of law, and surrounded, laws which at present are placed upon
too, by this judicial and legal so- the statute book. I am fully aware that,
lemnity, suffering, also, under severe from the prejudices sought to be instilled,
indisposition, and, in the face of such and fostered with a careful but unworthy
a combination of untoward circumstances, assiduity into the minds of that class to
having to defend myself from the charges which you belong, with regard to tho"'S
which have been preferred against me by principles of which I, amongst others
the party for the prosecution, having to, here, am the unworthy but mincere repre-

258
sentative, that I might, perhaps, have
availed myself of a course of proceedure in
the conducting of my defence, more likely to secure at your hands a verdict of
acquittal. But, gentlemen, I have come
here not anticipating anything from your
pity-I have no desire to avail myself,
perhaps of the fleeting sympathy which
in my address to you I might, in the circumstances I at present stand before you,
create by entering into some details, which,
if told to you here, might have the effect
of harrowing up the finer sensibilities of
your nature. No, gentlemen, I take
higher, more noble, and more elevated
ground; I demand from your sense of
justice that which I would scorn to
accept from any other source. Turn, then,
your attention, for a moment, to the nature of the evidence brought forward
against me by the prosecutors. To what
does the sum and substance of it, in your
estimation-to what will it, after a careful, mature, and legitimate consideration,
amount ? Has it been proven in evidence,
that I have been directly or indirectly
connected with those to whom the witnesses have spoken, as being present at
any of those disturbances which have prevailed in various parts of the country ?
Has it been proven to you that I have recommended at any time, or under any
circumstances, a course, the tendency of
which would have been to lead to a violation of the public peace ? Have I recommended, gentlemen, the violating, or the bursting asunder of all,
or any, of those ties which bind society together ? Have I incited the
people to acts of violence, outrage, physical force, or intimidation ? Nothing
of the kind, gentlemen, I submit, has
been proved in my case, nor, I submit, in the case of any of the defendants.
We have been arraigned under that
monstrous indictment, of such incomparable magnitude; but could I, without
infringing on the forms of such a court
as this, refer you back to the circumstances connected with my arrest-could
I call to your recollection, without transgressing the standing order of this court,
t e evidence produced against me, on
#hich the magistrates at Manchester
considered themselves justifidd in committing me for trial at the last special,
commission-could I recall those wit-

nesses, and place them in that box, you
would then find that, instead of having
incited the people to acts of violenceinstead of having recommended the people to any course at variance with the
usages, laws, and established customs
of the couutry, I had recommended,
gentlemen, not merely in general terms,
but plainly and directly, the preservation
and conservation of the public peacethat I have inculcated doctrines wholly
in accordance with peace, law, and order,
and not with anarchy and confusionthat, I have urged, imperatively, the sacredness of property, and the inviolability of person-that I have urged the
people to a peaceful demeanour in the
carrying Qut of that struggle, which they,
unfomented by me, unexcited by me,
and altogether unconnected with me,
thought proper to embark in-that while
continuing that struggle in which they
thought proper to be engaged, I inculcated on them the imperative and important necessity of respecting even the
opinions of those whom they conceived
to be their enemies, or from whom they
have felt themselves in duty bound conscientiously to differ. It seems to me
that there is something rather contradictory, gentlemen, in the following up
of this very circuitous, ill-connected,
though, no doubt, in the estimation of
the prosecutor, very formidable array of
evidence-it seems as if something was
wanting in the closely connected links
by which they thought proper to trepan
me into the ranks of the defendants
ranged in that indictment. How is it
that the witnesses, on the strength of
whose evidence I was arraigned in Manchester, have not been brought into that
box, in order that they might give that
evidence here, before this tribunal, which
justified the magistrates committing me
for trial at the last assizes ? These witnesses, on being cross-examined in the
Court at Manchester, swore distinctly,
and unhesitatingly, that I had recommended the people-that I was so minute
in my definitions of property-that so
precise and concise was I, lest I should
be understood to speak in general termsthey swore distinctly and unhesitatingly
that I recommended the people to protect
every blade of grass in their respective
vicinities, and to guard every square of

259

glass in the town in which they resided. ducing in the social fabric, have to an-

I lso recommended them to respect the swer for his temerity at the bar of his
private opinions of those with whom country? Gentlemen, I trust that such
they conscientiously differed. Why were a gloomy day has not yet arrived. I
not those witnesses brought forward ? trust that Englishmen are not yet deSimply that, in the absence of all the prived of the liberty of speech-I trust
truth, you might assume that I was they are not yet under the domination of
guilty--that you might form a judgment military despotism; that that right which
from the garbled statements of those who has been guaranteed by the constitution of
swore that they left the meeting immedi- this country, will be this day, inmy case,
ately after I recommended the people to confirmed and sealed by your verdict,
continue a peaceful agitation for the and that you will prove by my acquitCharter. I allude now to the evidence tal that we yet retain some of those
given at the meeting at Eccles, and to functions, rights and privileges in the
that given by the 'foreman of the Wors- enjoyment of which we are, on all occasions,
I have yet to priding ourselves, as being inthat respect
ley Forge Company.
learn, that to recommend a peaceful agi- superior to all other nations of the world.
tation for the establishment of the prin- It is not for me to tell you that this right
ciples embodied in the People's Charter, is guaranteed to the people by our conis calculated, in itself, to subject me to stitution-that thatconstitution, with all its
the pains and penalties of an indictment for defects, still holds that right sacred and
conspiracy. We had also a powerful array inviolate. That right may be,with truth,
of evidence brought forward in the witness said to be, in the language of an eloquent
box at Manchester, speaking to a meeting and an impartial writer, " the nation's
which I addressed at Leigh. You had safety valve." It is the only medium
one witness here to prove that he drove through which can be viewed, with anyme in a post chaise a distance of eight or thing like exactness, the true state of the
nine miles, on Thursday the 11th of Au- public mind. The liberty of speech is
gust. Gentlemen, I admit all that is the mirror by which are reflected the
sworn against me. I have never denied wishes, desires, and feelings of the gobeing at Eccles, or Leigh; but does the verned, so as to give to the governors a
bare fact of having been at either of those right view of the state of those they proplaces, and riding in a post chaise-does fess to govern. If you dam up this legithis bare fact justify the Attorney-Gene- timate medium-if you obscure this only
ral in including me in the indictment for mirror-if you dam up this legitimate
conspiracy and sedition ? Gentlemen, it channel through which we find access to
is deposed, in order to lead to a convic- those who profess to be our representa-.
tion, that I told the people they must tives-that medium through which alone
continue a peaceful agitation. I may, we can make them acquainted with our
perhaps, be out of the strict letter of the desires and our wants-gentlemen, pause
evidence if I say that the witness deposed ere you pronounce a verdict which will
to the word "peaceful"--but, gentlemen, go tc. stem this torrent of free enquiryhas he sworn that I said, " want was before you commit an act suicidal in
stalking through the land ?" If he did its tendency, and nationally disastrous
not, he, or some other person from the in its ultimate results. Ponder well what
same vicinity, swore it on a former occa- you pave the way for by preventing the
sion. Gentlemen, I have yet to learn legitimate, legal, and peaceful expression
whether all the evidence brought forward of public opinion. You, gentlemen, do
by the poor law commissioners of the one of two things; you either reduce
state of this country, and reiterated by those, of whose freedom of thought and
me at the meeting at Eccles, is sufficient action you take credit to yourselves of
that being gua~dians, protectors, and promoto make me a criminal, I1 stated i
want was stalking through the land ? Is ters, or, otherwise, you pave the way for
this a crime? Must penuryand destitu- the people having recourse to other meti*wlie concealed from the public eye, diums-to those other channels, through
4ad Ilust he who attempts to lift the veil, which the indignation burning in their hb-

atd -expose the evils which want is pro-

soms sometimes findsvent. Deprive men9f

260
the liberty of speech-preventthe free expresson of thought, and you drive the people tothe adoption of those desperate remedies which,I trust, will never be on this, or
any future occasion, the result of a verdiet of a British jury, empanelled for the
purpose of giving their deliberate, due,
and legitimate consideration, to a case
bearing on the liberty of the subject.
We stand here to day ayraigned before
the tribunal of our country for expressing our desires, for giving vent to our
feelings, for giving expression to that
which we believe to be in accordance
with the truth, and which, gentlemen,
has not led to one solitary violation of
the peace, or the destruction of one
penny-worth of property. It has been
proved on the part of the Crown, that
from the moment that conference was held
in Manchester, up to the present time,
every thing assumed a pacific character.
That from the 20th of August to the
present time, matters, all over the country, were tranquillizing down to their
formerly peaceful character. It is surpassing strange, that, in the town of
Liverpool, it was conceived to be necessary that six officers should be
dispatched to my residence for the purpose of my arrest, though knowing that
my household was small and my family
not numerous-that the nature of my
pursuits was of an entirely pacific character-it was thought necessary to
dispatch six police officers to my residence to secure my arrest, and place me
in the hands of the police authorities-it
is strange, I say, that none of these six
police officers have been placed in the
witness-box. And how is it, that out of
almost 200 letters, from various parts of
the country, which they felt it to be
their duty to remove from my home,
and which, I am legally advised, have
been laid before the law-officers of the
Crown- how is it, that in order to
prove this wide, and deep-seated conspiracy, nothing has been brought forward to show that I held a correspondence of a seditious and conspiratory characLer with those parties from whom I
was in the habit of receiving letters-four
or five every day in the week? Had there
been anything in existence approxinqating to a deep-seated conspiracy, I would
ask the Atorney-General would there be

anything so confirmatory of the accusation, as the production of the documents
found in the possession of the various
conspirators, when they were pounced
upon unexpectedly, their homes searched
by those officials, and every document
taken possession of and placed in the
hands of the law officers of the Crown, by
whom they were, no doubt, carefully, sedulously, and vigilantly examined ? But,
no doubt, all these matters, though of a
strictly penal character, did not at all implicate those with whom I held correspondence, or myself, to as to justify the
prosecutor in bringing them forward to
sustain the indictment to which I have
referred. Permit me to ask, was there
anything unusual in my riding from Eccles to Leigh in a post-chaise ? Was it
anything unusual in the coachman on his
return, after having refreshed himself and
his steeds, to see me addressing a meeting, the numbers of which he deposes
not to, (I confess it was a large meeting)
and to see me removing my hat, and bowing to the audience ? Itis passing strange
that nothing is deposed to, as to what
transpired at that meeting in Leigh. I
found that the whole country had voluntarily ceased from labour. I tried, in the
first instance, to ascertain why they had
ceased from labour, but no man to whom
I putthe question could give me anything
like a legitimate answer. I then told the
meeting, which was composed of several
thousands-" As long as you have no
legitimate object in view, my advice
-nay, my command is-if I have any
influence-that you return to labour till
you see something legitimate to justify
you in ceasing from that labour. That
was on Thursday evening. Gentlemen,
it looks rather suspicious that all evidence, as connected with the proceedings
of that meeting, is carefully kept back
from the witness box. Nothing has transpired at that meeting, you may rely on it,
but what is in the possession of the parties conducting this prosecution. From
the indefatigable exertions on the part
of the Crown to bring to a successful issue
this prosecution, forget not this fact-that
the credit, importance, standing, and high
legal ability of all who conducted this
prosecution are more or less at stake in
the result which may attend your verdict.
Then, gentlemen, how is it that all evi-.

261
dence as to what transpired at Leigh-at
the meeting at which I took off my hat
and bowed to the audience-how is it
that such evidence is carefully kept back
though in the possession of the prose'
cutor? Because, as I shewed, the people
of Leigh could give no definite answer
why they had left their work. They said
that the people in other parts of the
country had ceased from labour. Following out the fashionable excitement
then going the round of the country, they
thought proper to cease from labour also,
not knowing why or wherefore they did
so. I could put witnesses into that box
to shew that they, acting on my advice,
returned to their work on Friday morning, but I could not be with them on
Friday night, and they were so infatuated
with the reports reaching them from other
places, that they again left their employment on Friday evening, and I know
not when they returned. At all events
they went to labour on Friday morning
in consequence of the imperative urgency
of my request, that they would go to
work until they knew why they had
ceased their labour. Very great stress
has been laid on the meeting of the
Mr. Cartledge, I
17th of August.
think, said that two men were ordered
away from Mr. Scholefield's chapel because they said they wished the meeting
to be private. But two reasonable deductions may be drawn from this. You
may probably suppose that we wished
the meeting to be private in consequence
of its very seditious character. Nothing
of the kind, gentlemen; nothing could
be further from the truth than to draw
any such conclusion from the evidence.
It was detailed to you in evidence, that
Mr. O'Connor wasso desirous of avoiding
the gathering of mobs about the place
where he was, that he took precautionary
means to prevent it. He escaped in private from Noblett's house, that there
might not be a crowd flocking there to
witness his arrival in Manchester. Two
men were ordered away from the front of
the chapel, because these two men would
be the means of collecting two men
more; the four would soon increase to
eight, the eight to sixteen, and so on by
gradual progression till a large crowd
would have assembled, whichl would probably require the interference of the

authorities to disperse them. In order to
prevent the possibility of large masses
congregating in that part of the town,
or anything calculated to cause the least
alarm to the authorities, it was resolved
that none of our friends, whom we could
make so free with as to order away from
the place, should be permitted to assemble round the chapel, lest by any means
such results might follow. You have
also had it in evidence, that a secretary
was appointed by the conference, to examine the credentials of the delegates.
In the cross-examination of either Griffin
or Cartledge, the nature of the duties of
that secretary appeared to be to ascertain
whether all the delegates attending that
conference were elected at public meetings, legally called, to represent in that
conference the various localities from.
which they were sent. Gentlemen, the
evidence of Griffin, so far as it affects me,
must give rise in your minds to some reflections of a rather painful character. You
must have discovered that all manly
feeling-all the higher and more elevated
attributes of man, were wholly prostrated,
dormant, and destroyed in the bosom
of that man who could, in that witness
box, coolly, callously and indifferently
admit, in the face of twelve men appointed
to adjudicate on my case, that, when he
visited me in the prison, on the charge
for which I was arrested, he expressed
the utmost sorrow for my incarceration,
and the most lively sentiments of sympathy with me. He was three hours with
me in the railway tavern, and shaked the
warm hand of friendship with me on my
returning to my family; having escaped
the bolts and bars and dungeon gates of
Manchester; breathing once more the
atmosphere of heaven; free from the
hands of the law, and brought back again
to liberty-he could then shake hands
with me, and congratulate me on my release from prison, although he had just
gone to the Manchester authorities, and
had given that information on which I
was again arrested after parting with him,
and having a friendly and warm-hearted
shake hands with him. Viewing, as I
naturally should do, conduct so utterly at
variance with all the best and noblest attributes of our nature, the heinousness
and blackness that must pervade the
heart and mind of the man, who could
s

-' 2
o far assume the garb of black hypocrisy as to express his gratification at
being in the man's company whom he
expected to have again incarcerated,and, if he could but form an idea of the
itagnittide and importance of that indictkiient, he could have no guarantee but
That the probable result would be that I
should be sent across the seas-that man
ihow
comes forward, and in the presence
of:those who were once his bosom friends,
volunteers his services to confine again
to a dungeon, if possible, the man on
Whose arm he leant, on whose shoulder
he reclined, at whose board he was entertained, by whose money his expences
w ere often defrayed, and who has been
lept more or less from starving in consequence of the exertions he used on his behalf. Gentlemen, you must feel more
or less the blackness-you must feel more
or less that you had not prepared your
:iinds for such prostrate depravity in human nature. I presume you will make
very little reference to the fact immediately after the sitting of that conference.
On the 17th of August, or, at least, immediately after the 20th of August, all
ihdications of tumult and disturbance
had gradually subsided in Manchester.
This fact has been deposed to in that
:box. This is an important fact, and
ought to be well and carefully considered by you, as calculated, in itself, to
show that from the sitting of that conference up to the present period, no such
.results as might be anticipated from the
charges in that indictment followed the
sitting of the conference in Manchester.
I have been recognised both by Cartledge
and Griffin, as being a member of that
conference. They have distinctly sworn
to me as being a member of that conference; but I think the legality of
that conference has already been so
sufficiently established by the learned
counsel who preceded mne, as to make it
unnecessary for me to prove its legality. The only matter with which
I have to grapple is the evidence respecting the twomeetingsatLeigh and Eccles.
In the neighbourhood -bf Eccles it is true,
that, as was sworn by Fryar, the hands
turned out. The first meeting Was held
at six: o'clock in the mnorning, in the
Marktqilace, at Edlles, and, althotigh
rFyar pleaded ignrawce. of the usattdi

there were certainly two magistrates at
that meeting. One of these was in a
gig. I was surrounded by the constabulary of Eccles. My address lasted one
hour and a quarter, and during the whole
of that time not the slightest displeasure
was evinced either by the magistrates or
constabulary by whom I was surrounded.
No, gentlemen, but had they conceived
that my language was calculated to excite
the people to acts contrary to the lawhad I counselled the destruction of property, I feel convinced, gentlemen, as I am
sure you feel confident, those magistrates
would be placed in that box, to depose to
the seditious nature of that address which
I delivered at that meeting. Now, gentlemen, this is merely introduced in order to
claim for myself the legality of speaking on
subjects in connection with which I hold
strong opinions.
This is introduced
merely to show, that it is not in the province of the learned gentlemen conducting the prosecution, nor is it in the province of any one of his order, to concoct an indictment, so as to show to
you that you can possibly bring a verdict of guilty against me for having
spoken such words as were deposed to
by the witness, Joseph Fryar, in that
box. It is for this right alone I contend-the right of speaking freely on
political subjects. Fryar said I recommended them to continue the struggle
for the Charter. Gentlemen, it is necessary for me to premise that, prior to my
visit to Eccles, two or three of the leading men of the turn-outs being invited
to give an address calculated to r(strain
the volatile and refractory, and at the
same time infuse spirit among the turnouts, we met in order to prevent anything leading to a breach of the peace
in that vicinity; and I feel proud, and
highly gratified, that such had been the
result of our visit to Eccles. And
should my visit to Eccles result in a
verdict of guilty, still the satisfaction [
shall have experienced in having removed all asperity Of feeling, through
my humble address then dehlivered,
which had the effect of restraining
bad feeling and the destruction of
property, will compenhsate ior the worst
thing I can contetmplate at your hands.
But I contemiplate iothing of the kinad,
for the evidnce is-of Mcth a fthnsy,

263

trifling, and insignificant character, that walls of this castle, incacerate
. cannot see how you can, on the
strength of Fryar's evidence, and the
evidence of the coachman who drove me
to Leigh, convict me of sedition, riots,
tumults, and all the vocabulary of things
comprehended in that indictment. Gentlemen, extremely sorry should I be to
attribute anything to you like motives
after the painful exhibition of your patience, which you have given during this
very long and protracted trial for conspiracy. Sorry would I be, indeed, to attribute to you anything approximating to
unworthy motives, whatever may be the
result of your verdict, but I must confess
that, from the nature of the evidence, I
cannot divest my mind of the latent
conviction working there, that, if I be imprisoned, it surely cannot be from the
insignificant nature of the evidence
which the Attorney-General has brought
forward.
But I anticipate no such
thing. In consequence of the many
speakers you have yet to hear, and of
the numbers who have already addressed
you; and the protracted nature of the
attention, which you, in your official capacity had to pay to all and everything
since the opening of the Court, I shall
not detain you much longer. I must
say that I had prepared a far different
defence, which I should have made, if I
had not sympathized with you in the
onerous duty you have to perform. But,
gentlemen, in conclusion, should my imprisonment be the result of your deliberations-should you convict me in order
to prevent the spread and progress,
teaching and expounding, of those opinions, of which I am the sincere, and not
less honest, though humble advocate, I
would be far from imputing to the jury
in that box such a desire, but I have
known from reading history, that, in
times gone by (and human nature, more
or less throughout all stages of the
world's history is the same), it was sufficient to lead to conviction, that the
party accused held opinions at variance
with the received and acknowledged
dogmas of the age in which they lived.
Should you, by your verdict, confine me
to the restraints and indignities of a prison, I need not tell you that that verdict
cannot affect my mind. .You may, gantlenien, within the enclosure of the stone

y mol
and material part, but the mind will
be free to range in all the buoyancy and elasticity of its native character; it will rise superior to allthe bols,
and bars, and dungeon gates in which
my body lies concealed, and soaring
aloft on the radiant wings of sanguine
hope, revel in the anticipated noontide
blaze of my country's freedom.
He
who undertakes to stand boldly forward
in opposition to the popular opinion of
the day in which he lives, need not
set himself up as the opponent of the
already-received opinions of ages, unless
he has well calculated the costs whihh
are to follow as the results of such opposition. But, gentlemen, I have not
opposed opinions that have been received and acted upon from ages, but
from a sincere and heartfelt conscioasness of the rectitude of the position
which I assume. I have but little further to say, but, in conclusion, to remark,
that whatever may be the conclusion of
this trial, I shall, with perfect submission--without a feeling of remorsewithout the slightest indication of regret,
receive your decision. I have never,
by my teaching or example, at anytime
throughout the course of my life, violated
that duty which I owe to myself, and
to those with whom I have been for
years engaged; I have done my duty as
a citizen of these realms, in endeavouring to do, for the bulk of the population,
the greatest possible amount of good,the greatest possible amount of happiness of which their nature is susceptible
of enjoying. It may be in your opinion,
that my opinions are at variance with
any thing you ever heard asserted in
a Court like this, but the novelty of the
doctrine does not militate against its
truth. I have been at the meetings in
Eccles and Leigh, I acknowledge having
been at the conference-that is the only
evidence adduced against me. I now
leave my case in your hands, patiently,
though rather indifferently, awaiting te
result of your verdict.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL :-I
have looked over the evidence, and do not
find that there is any evidence that
Allinson was at the conference on t..-e
17th of August. There is some evidene
of his being cseen there after the ~e .

264
ing was over, but I woul4 not rely upon
it.
The JUDGE:-In the evidence I
have taken he said-" The struggle was
over, and he advised them to go to
work, and get the Charter by lawful
means."
The Jury then, by the direction of the
Court, acquitted Allinson.
WILLIAM BEESLEY :-I will not
occupy much time as I am conscious that
you are already fatigued and wearied with
the incessant attention which this case
required at your hands. I would briefly
allude to those circumstances of it which
concern myself, and I trust they will receive
from you that consideration which will
enable you to give an impartial verdict.
It is indeed difficult to see in what way
the evidence bears against me at all; I
shall, perhaps, best consult my interest by
saying nothing, for I really cannot conceive that there is any evidence at all
against me. Nothing has been brought
home to me in connection with the case;
I have not been identified in or with
it. No charge has even been preferred against me, for I have never been
arrested on the charge contained in this
indictment, nor have I ever pleaded to it,
guilty or not guilty, never having been
required to do so. True, it has been
sworn by Cartledge, that I was at the
conference; but no effort has been made
to bring home this evidence to me. It
has not been shewn that I was the
Beesley meant. There are many Beesleys besides me, and I am not bound to
assist the Government, by my admission,
in securing my conviction. But though
I am aware of this, I have no wish to
avail myself of quirks and quibbles. I
am not the man to shelter myself under
the false mark of evasion; I will assert
the truth always without fear of consequences. It has not been proved that I
was at the conference; but I am not
going to deny it; I was at that conference.
I went there at the request and as the
representative of the inhabitants of myown
locality; and if another such conference
should be called, having like purposes in
view, and if my neighbours and friends
should again elect me, I should again
feel it my duty to attend. I have yet to
learn,-and I trust that from your verdict
I shall not learn it,-..that the bare fact

of my attending that meeting can be con
strued as a crime; for Iwas there, I took
part in the proceedings of the conference,
and the partI took was in opposition to the
strike; not because I consider the strike
to be unjustifiable or illegal, but because,
in my judgment, it is impolitic to mix up
the Chartist movement with it. I think
it calculated to retard that movement
which my heart holds dearest of all things,
and hence my opposition to the proceedings of those who sought to use it as a
means of advancing that movement. If
I thought that the Chartist movement
could be thereby accelerated, I would uphold the strike, though I might for so doing be called conspirator, or branded with
any other epithet which the Crown lawyers might think fit to apply to me. In
my own district I have laboured to repress violence, and to cause life and property to be respected. I am too poor to
bring witnesses to speak to these facts, but
I know them to be within the knowledge
of the Attorney-General, and I might appeal to him as my best witness. The
learned gentleman has sent out a commission to enquire into the state of my
neighbourhood, and I know that the commission has been informed that the preservation of peace has been mainly owing
to my exertions. The Attorney-General
knew this, and it would have been candid
in him to have told it to the jury, and
have saved me the trouble of doing so.
I know it was told him, that through the
exertions of myself and other friends we
were enabled to keep the peace of the
country. So deep was the distress, so
universal was the poverty and destitution
of the people, that they had to eat the dead
carcases of cows, dug up after they were
buried. The men were taking the carcases of dead calves to their wives for
food when they were confined. Through
my instrumentality the peace of that district was kept. I had at one time much
to do with the spies employed against me.
At this time there is a spy in the employment of that man (M'Cabe) who swore
to the resolution. That spy was turned
out of my doors. He is now a local constable. He came to my house time after
time to persuade me to bring out the people, that we might get up a physical revolution-(this he did to entrap me) and
that he would take part in destroying the

265
mills. This policeman is not ignorant
of this, but I have lodged informations
against him. Why is not he arrested?
Why is not he placed here in the position
of a defendant ? Is it I that ought to be
standing here ? No, but this man, and
the superintendent who employed him to
drag others into the commission of acts of
violence, in order that he might turn round
to give evidence against them. The oath
of the individual to whom I have alluded
is taken against other parties, and on his
oath they have been committed.

member having any of them in my possession, but I suppose the oath of a
policeman will be taken before the oath
of any other man, especially when the
policeman is swearing for the Crown.
Remember, it is an acknowledged fact,
that I attended that conference for purposes legal in themselves, and different
firom those now charged in the indictment. Here is the resolution:" Resolution of the Delegates :-That whilst
the Chartist body did not originate the present

The cessation from labour, this conference of dele-

ioath of an individual now confined in this gates from various parts of England, express
castle is also to be taken against the de- their deep
endants. He dare not show his face,workin men now on strike; and that we
rking men now on strike; and that we
mor associate with the working classes,
the contifor the detest him for his base actions. strongly approve the extension and
It is on the evidence of such men as these nuance of their present struggle till the People's
the Government expect to get a conviction Charter becomes a legislative enactment, and
against us. During the whole of the decide forthwith to issue an address to that
strike not one particle of property was de- effect; and pledge ourselves on our return to our
stroyed in the neighbourhood where I re- respective localities, to give a proper direction
sided. They have not been able even to to the People's efforts.
(Signed)
JAMES ARTHUR, Chairmat.
bring forward evidence that the Executive
bill was posted in that neighbourhood.
J. ARRAN, Secretary."
They have not brought forvard a special I have been alluded to by my friend
constable, policeman, or any other person Harney in his address, as one who opto show that I have taken part in any posed this resolution. I would not have
public meeting, riot, or anything by referred to this if it had not been noticed
which the public,peace could be endan- by him. I now say, that I approve of
gered. I do not know, therefore, to what every act of this conference; for I believe
to direct my defence. The only other the people of this country have a right, if
-matter of evidence against me is that of the majority of them think fit, to change
Superintendent M'Cabe, who deposed to the laws of this country. If the people
having found in my carpet bag, when think right to do so, and call for my astaking me into custody upon a former sistance, I will give it to them willingly.
charge, several printed papers, purporting I opposed the late turn-out with all my
to be the resolution of the conference. I might. The magistrates of Accrington
have no recollection of these papers. I and Hopwood requested me to become
am not aware that they were in my car- a special. constable, and so far was the
pet bag, nor has any proof been adduced peace preserved in that neighbourhood,
that the papers produced were the same that not a pane of glass nor a blade of
that were alleged to have been found on grass was destroyed. Every thing passed
me. But, supposing them to be so-and off quietly. I myself, and many of the
I have no disposition to be nice about the enrolled Chartists, were so far opposed to
matter-what then ? What is there in the strike, that we tendered ourselves to
the possession of these documents to cri- be sworn in as special constables. It was
minate any man ? I am sorry they have by a meeting of special constables thatI was
not left me an odd one, or I would read elected to go and sit in the Manchester
it to you. (A laugh.)
conference. I could not, therefore, have
The ATTORNEY-GENERALhand- conspired with any one to create any
ed Beesley a copy of the resolution passed revolution or rebellion. I was opposed
at the conference of delegates in Man- to the strike, because I thought it was
chester.
got up and concocted by the Anti-corn-

BEESLEY :-This, I suppose, is the law League; I wish to give no offence
resolution found on me. I do not re- to any gentleman. I attended meetings

at th-t time, and I advised the people Cartledge, nor Griffin, recognized me as

to have nothing to do with the strike,
for that party who got it up had a power,
behind the scene, that would soon enable
them to put it down. This was the reason whyI recommended the people to have
nothing to do with it. And when I sat
in' the conference I voted against the
Chartist cause being mixed up with
the turn-out, not because I thought it
was wrong, but because I knew we were
not the originators of the strike, and
therefore we should not be identified
with it. But if convinced, that by a
general cessation from labour we could
have carried our object, then I would
have been the first to recommend the
people to cease firom labour. Whether
that recommendation be called conspiracy or not, I have always understood
that it has been the privilege of
Englishmen to meet for the purpose
of expressing their political opinions.
We met for the purpose of reconsidering our plan of organization, and we
had no idea that anything of an illegal
character, or tendency, should take place.
So far were we from intending to do
anything illegal, that we admitted to the
meeting several parties who were not
members. But we even admitted reporters.
Consequently I can see no
conspiracy in the case. I will not enter
into a long justification, or speech, for I
kiow that you yourselves are as much
tired of this as I am, and I am sorry that
you should have been kept so long with
the speeches of counsel, and the examination of witnesses. It is not our fault,
bat that of the Crown. I have been
dragged from home before I could make
the necessary arrangements for my defence; and I have been in thil court since
last Saturday week, and ordered not to
depart the Court, though others were not
required to attend here till Wednesday.
But an insignificant lawyer in Burnley
served me with this notice. I made application to know who desired him to
serve it, and his answer was-" You
must go; it is my business to serve him,
and you have no right to ask any questions." Thus have I been treated at the
hands of those who served me with a notiee to attend this court. Can I expect
that a verdict will be pronounced against
me on the evidence adduced ? Neither

beingin the conference. But, gentlemen,
it is not for being a member of the conference, or a conspirator, that I have been
arrested, but simply for being a Chartist.
I believe that is the sole cause why I have
to stand before you in this place. If that
be so, then let me tell the Crown and
the Attorney-General, if they want to
suppress Chartism in this way, they will
be much mistaken. They may imprison
us within the precincts of this dreary prison-they may incarcerate us within these
walls, but can they stop the enquiry that
is going on among the people? You
may, gentlemen, by your verdict, lock me
up in prison, but the moment I get out I
will begin again to advocate my principles. My principles will remain unaltered, and my determination to assert them
equally so. I am a Chartist, and whatever amount of persecution or imprisonment that may subject me to, I will remain a Chartist. Your verdietmay consign me to a dungeon for a season, but
the time will soon pass over; and when
the gates shall be again unbarred, and I
am permitted to emerge once more into the
free air of heaven, I will be the same man.
Ten thousand prosecutions cannot alter
my principles, for I am determined, while
life lasts, to sound the toesin of the Charter as the death-note of tyranny and faction. Let 10,000 convictions be obtained against me, and I will be a Chartist
still.
CHRISTOPHER DOYLE :-- My
Lord, and gentlemen of the jury, I will
not do as several of the gentlemen who
addressed you. I will not make any
apology for trespassing on your time. I
have a good reason for doing so. In fact
I consider it no trespass. My liberty is
at stake, and therefore I think you will
bear with me, and hear me patiently.
This is the first time in my life Ihave
had to defend myself, and, I assure you,
I am rather diffident in doing so, more
especially when I consider that several
gentlemen who have sat here-some of
whom belong to the legal profession, are
more able to defend me than I am myself,
so far as law is concerned: but with all due
deference to the legal acquirements of those
persons, I think I know my own case better; and because I never will endeavour to
escape getting off punishment by getting

267
2pother man, who, having a better education and being more eloquent, can better
advocate my case. I have every respect
for the gentlemen of the bar, I can assure
you; there are many of them ornaments
to society, and many of them who have advocated those political principles which I
in common with the other defendants hold.
Gentlemen, I am charged in this large
indictment-I will not call it monstrous,
because, probably, it would not be polite
to do so-I am charged in this indictment
with being a conspirator-with associating with others and conspiring with them
in order to upset the laws and institutions
of the country. If I were guilty of such
a charge I assure you, gentlemen, I would
deserve punishment; I dare say I would
not at all feel angry at your bringing in
a verdict of guilty against me. But I am
not conscious of conspiring with any
party, by illegal means to upset the laws
and institutions of this country; which
laws and institutions I believe to be imperfect. I have no desire to do so. I
never had. But I have a desire, and have
previously had a desire, to change the institutions of this country by legal and
constitutional means; by appealing to the
reason of man, and not to his passions;
by endeavouring by the sword of argument to convince every man of the absolute necessity of joining with me to successfully carry out the great principles
emdodied in the Charter. We are told
by the learned Attorney-General that I,
amongst others, did from the 1st of
August, up to the 1st of October, conspire to upset the laws of the country.
Gentlemen, on the 1st of August, I
had no more to do with this strike
than the man in the moon, as the common phrase is; I just know as much about
it as a pig would know about geometry. Up
to the 11th, or rather the 10th, of August,
this indictment does not bring me in connection with the turn-outs. It appears
that a man, who styles himself a dresser
by trade, states, that I was at a meeting,
in Stockport, on Thursday. He states
that he did not hear me say anything.
He also states, that I was in a prison. Why, gentlemen, I can assure you,
as an honest man, that I was not in
Stockport on that day at all. I was in
the town of Manchester-six miles from
Stockport-on that day; I never did go

to a meeting there that day.

I knew

nothing of the meeting, and, if his Lordship will call to mind the evidence, he
will find I was not there at all that day.
He will find, from the governor of the
union-workhouse, that certain parties-a
mob as it is called-meetings of the
people, now-a-days, are termed mobs-he
will find, from this man's testimony, that
the union-workhouse was attacked; but
no mention is made of my name. But,
suppose I attended a public meeting of
the people, in Stockport, would I act
illegally by so doing ? If I did not use
inflammatory or seditious language, I
certainly would not be acting illegal. I
have attended scores and hundreds of
meetings; I have attended meetings where
there was a great deal of angry feeling;
I have opposed certain parties on political
questions; a great deal of angry feeling
was evinced at those meetings ;-none on
my part; the people felt exasperated
against those who were opposed to me.
I did not. They maybe right or wrong;
that is none of my business. If I had
attended a meeting in Stockport, it does
not appear to me how, by so doing, I
could have acted illegally, or broken what
are called the laws of my country. The
next witness who appears against me is
a man of the name of Crompton, a policeman. I confess I have no great relish
for policemen, generally; others may
have respect for them, but I confess I have
not. I assure you I would rather there
was such a state of society that there
would be no necessity for them. I would
like to see the people so happy and com-.
fortable, and so intellectual, that there
would be no necessity at all for policemen
to preserve the peace of the country.
However this policeman appears in that
box; he eads evidence; he reads his
notes, which he says he took while I was
addressing some thousands of the people.
He was surrounded by the people while
taking those notes, and yet we find the
notes in that book written very straight.
How is it possible that a man who was
not a short-hand writer, who never took
notes before, could take correct notes of
what occurred at that meeting ? I would
appeal to any experienced reporter if this
could be done. I defy any short-hand
writer to take a correct note of my speech.
It would be
terly impossible for him.

268
Yet this man takes notes very straight
while standing in the midst of a crowd !
Gentlemen, I am sure it will be much in
my favour that the people saw this man
taking notes, and, according to his own
admission, never interfered. Does this
shew a desire on the part of the people to
do anything illegal or improper ? A
gentleman named Shepley, a manufacturer, was at that meeting. I admit that
I was at that meeting. I will not tell a
lie to get off. O no, my friends. Well,
this Shepley heard me deliver this speech.
He was asked about Doyle's speech, and
he said he did not agree with certain
parts of it. " He was a Chartist, and I
don't like Chartists." Here is a master
who employs 400 or 500 persons, and he
did not come into the witness box to
shew that I advised the people to break
the peace. Did I advise the people to
stay out till the Charter became the law
of the land? Suppose I did so; was
that illegal ? No, I have a perfect right
to do so. Mr. Dundas, a legal gentleman, says, every man has a right to do
so, provided he does not advise them to
break the peace. Did I do so ? No, I
did not. On the contrary, the witness
admitted that I was the means of obtaining permission for a gentleman to have
his work finished when it was spoiling,
and had I not been there that gentleman's
work would not have been finished. I
was applied to, and I told them that this
gentleman should be allowed to finish his
work-that no party had a right to interfere with any gentleman carrying on his
business. I never went to any factoryI never attempted to head a mob to turn
out the work people. I had no connexion with the people causing that
strike. True, I took some part in the
struggle. I did so, convinced that the
people had a right to meet for the purpose
of considering the Wages Question, or
that of the Charter. I have still the same
opinion, and I have as good a right to
political power as any gentleman in the
court. The fact of my being poor is no
reason why I should not have a voice in
making those laws which I am called on
to obey. I believe that, unless the Charter
becomes the law of the land, the people
will have no protection for their labour
or their property. I shall hold that
opinion until I see that measure carried

into operation. Gentlemen, this witness
goes on to state, that a procession took
place afterwards and that I headed that
procession; and that I was from forty to
fifty yards from the people while they
were breaking the lock-gates. This is
his statement. My back was to them,
he admits, and, consequently, I could not
see what was done. But, I assure you,
gentlemen, and I vow before God and
my countrymen, that I know no more
about those lock-gates than you do now,
beyond hearing of it. But if I had the
means of bringing witnesses, I could
prove, as I said before that I was in the
town of Manchester at the time, and knew
nothing of what was going on at the canal. Gentlemen, I am well known in
this country as a political agitator. I
have agitated, and will again ; but Ihave
done so fairly and honestly, and I defy
any man to bring proof that on any one
occasionIdisobeyedthelaws. Ihaveadvised the people to obey the laws; though bad
I believed they were, yet, as far as they
were concerned I advised them to obey
them, until by union of action, and the
spread of brotherly affection, they compelled the government to give them those
rights which God and nature intended
Gentlemen, you
they should possess.
ought to be always doubtful of the evidence of a policeman, for there are many
facts to prove that these men would swear
oaths by the hundred-that they would
swear black was white, and that blue was
no colour, if required. I do not say that
this gentleman has done so, altogether,
but I say he has not told what was the
strict truth. I admit his evidence so far
as being at the meeting. I do not regard
being at the meeting, for I believe that so
far from breaking the peace, I kept it. I
can refer to Beswick and M'Mullen, the
latter of whom Mr. Dundas termed a
most respectable witness-I know them
well for years, and I defy them, or any
other set of men, to say that, directly or
indirectly, I induced any party to break
the laws of my country. So much for
the evidence of this policeman. What is
the next evidence against me ? Why
gentlemen, that I have been at the conference. Granted-I have been at many
a conference. Have there not been cornlaw repealing conferences, and has any
party been prosecuted for attending them P

269
To be sure they have a right to meet.
'They are men of property, station, and
influence in society. They believe that
the corn-laws operated aainst the commerce of the country, and against the interests of the working classes, and therefore they felt themselves called upon to
meet and deliberate on those laws, and to
ascertain if possibly there was a moral
power in the country sufficient to induce
the legislature to repeal those laws. They
met, and they had a perfect right to meet,
but if I were to go into the speeches of
those men, which I will not do, I would
find in them far more violent language
than was used at any of the meetings of
the chartists. The complete suffrage
men have held conferences, and they had
a right to do so. We did so; and from
what has been stated by Mr. Dundas,
the learned counsel for the defence,
you will come to the conclusion that
the objects for which that conference was called, were strictly legal.
We had no other object in view than
that of reorganizing the Chartist body,
and if we found anything illegal in it,
to alter it, so as to make it legal; to
heal those differences which unfortunately crept in among us, and to open
the monument erected to the memory of'
that immortal patriot, the late Henry
Hunt, Esq. We met there for the purpose of celebrating his anniversary. We
had no object in view but those I have
mentioned. We had a perfect right to
support our principles, as long as we
did so legally. I apprehend there has
not been any evidence adduced in this
court, to prove, that we, the Chartist
body, or those supposed to be leading
men in it, have taken any other steps
than those which are stricily legal, and
in accordance with the laws of the land.
Gentlemen, allow me to tell you, and I
think I may do so without being considered intrusive, that great men have
advocated, in this country, the great
principles of democracy. The Duke of
Richmond, a man of high standing,
was an intelligent and eloquent advocate
of those principles, in 1718. This man
did not believe, what certain parties would
have you to believe, that the Chartists
wanted to carry their measures for the
purpose of destroying the property of
the rich. This man was not afraid of

the working classes; he had great confidence in them, and believed, that if
complete suffrage was carried out, the
property of the rich would not be injured, but the poor would be enabled
to live by the sweat of their brow, and
the labour of their hands. This great
nobleman-an aristocrat too-was not
afraid that the working classes would
take his property from him. We also
find that Charles James Fox--a great
man before he was seduced-an honest
man before he took money, had ar
association in this country for the purpose of carrying the Charter. The Marquis of Lansdowne, another great man,
advocated the same views, and he was
not taken up for doing so. I assure
you, .most respectfully, that we have
been basely maligned and calumniated
by a great part of the press of this
country, who have attempted to show
to the world that we were bad characters,
and that our objects were wholly at
variance with the rights of men. The
press, certainly, made a great impression
on the minds of men; but, gentlemen,
whatever my political opinions may be,
or, whatever the opinions of those
who surround me may be, recollect,
that if you were, by your verdict,
to put a stop to us giving full
expression to our opinions, you do
not know how soon yourselves may lie

under the lash of the law. Liberty of
speech has been well spoken to by my
friend M'Cartney, and therefore I will
not dwell on it; but let me, as one acquainted with the conference, and as one
who voted on that resolution which has
been read in evidence, say, that I believe
the purport of that resolution to be strictly
legal. We believed that unless we struggled-struggled hard for our rights, we
could not obtain them. It has been customary with the Chartists to move resolutions in similar terms to the one passed
in that conference. One of the speakers
read the resolution; so have I and will
again. The resolution is quite legal in
its wording. We have struggled, and
will continue to struggle, for without
struggling no great object can be gained.
If I were to tell you the reasons that induced me to hold such opinions I could
give you sufficient ones, but I will not do
so. I am not here to advocate Chartist

270
priiples, exactly, because I know, my
Lord would at once say that that would
be wrong, but to grapple with the evidence adduced against me, and leave the
advocacy of my principles for other places
more suitable than the present; though
I would rather, if permitted, give an
exposition of those principles here in
order to remove all false impressions from
your minds respecting them, and the
object we had in view. Gentlemen, in
all the agitations that have taken place in
this country for what is called Chartism,
I think you will recollect that, generally
speaking, if there be any party, who more
than another ought to be thanked for
preserving the peace, it is the Chartist
body. Their struggle has ever been a
peaceful one; their constant motto has
been, "peace, law and order." Of course
wages became mixed up with the Chartist
question--a fair day's wages for a fair
day's work; and where is the man so bold
and daring as to say that he who produces should not have a fair chance of
consuming that which he does produce ?
I believe, Gentlemen, that the labour of
the people of this country will never be
protected until the working classes have
a voice in making those laws which they
are called upon to obey. We have struggled peacefully for this right, and I
believe that by struggling peacefully,
though the struggle may belong, we will
-altimately succeed. We have no object
in view but to regenerate our countrymen by the adoption of our principles.
We have contended for these principles
before every party; we have heard their
arguments; we have not fallen out with
them, believing that by peaceable and
friendly discussion we would come to an
agreement by means of which the people
would be greatly benefitted. I will now
draw to a conclusion. I will not beg of
you to acquit me, because I believe I
am not guilty. I do not ask for pity or
favour. I am conscious that I have not
broken the laws of this country-I am
not sure of having done anything that I
would not do to morrow if permitted;
consequently, I will not appeal to your
pity, or your mercy. I ask for no more
than justice; and if you conceive in your
conscience, that I have broken the laws of
the country, of course you will give your
verdict accordingly. I want no more,

but let me impress on your minds, before
I sit down, the necessity of your calmly
considering the evidence adduced before
you in this Court-of your carefully examining the evideice, and taking into consideration the character of some of the
witnesses who have appeared in that box;
and weighing well in your minds whether
those who are traitors and renegades from
their principles are worthy ofyour attention.
Gentlemen, I am sure I cannot but feel
thankful to you, as one of the defendants,
for your patient hearing of the evidence,
as well as of the speakers who have addressed you. It gives me this gratifying
consolation that you will not come to a
hasty conclusion- that you will calmly
examine whether what the learned Attorney-General has brought forward as
evidence to convict us, is of such a nature
as to warrant you in bringing in a verdict of "guilty " against us. I have
that confidence which will make an honest man bear with fortitude whatever the
Court may inflict on me.
Whoever
endeavours to effect any great good must
be prepared for contumely and opprobrium of the most wicked description, if
he means to stand firm to the principles
he has promulgated. Our principles are
in exact accordance with that divine and
moral maxim which says, " Do unto
others as you would they should do unto
you." But, if you come to the conclusion that I am not guilty, then, when I
retire to the circle of my friends, I will
have to say, that at all events I was not a
conspirator; that if there was a conspiracy at all in the country it was the conspiracy of poverty. Poverty was the cause
of the discontent, and I do not expect
that there will be peace in the country
Can
while the people are distressed.
you expect, gentlemen, that while millions are starving the people will be
satisfied ? No; if they could be satisfied
with oppression they would be base,
mercenary slaves. They should have
a fair remuneration for their labour,
and until they have that, you will not
have peace or content in this country.
I say that, and depend upon it if a
thorough change does not take place
in the institutions of this country you
will see nothing but discontent among
the working classes. I thank you for
your patient hearing of me, and will

271
now sit down, leaving my case in your
hands, confident that, as men who love
justice and truth above all, you will
bring no verdict against me only that in
accordance with the evidence brought
before you.
JONATHAN BAIRSTOW :- My
Lord, this is a new position in which I
now stand before you-a position which,
though I have never previously occupied
it, and which, however great may be the
embarrassment which I feel in rising before such an array of legal talent as that
presented in this court-yet it is a position which I feel justified in occupying
in my own defence. I feel justified in
rising to offer a few observations for the
purpose-not of explanation-but of laying before you with the utmost clearness
the facts connected with the circumstances sworn to by the two witnesses
who have mainly tendered evidence
against me. It is my object, gentlemen,
to strip all external and extraneous
matter, as far as I can, from the few
observations I intend to offer; and while
I do most cordially thank you for the
patience, and candour, and impartiality
with which you have listened to the very
lengthy and able defence of some of my
friends who preceded me to-day, I trust
you will lengthen that patience to hear
from myself a few observations likewise.
And to the learned judge I accord likewise my humble meed of approbation,
for the strict and severe impartiality
which he has displayed, from the commencement of the prosecution to the present moment. And to the learned Attorney-General I likewise accord my
praise for the dignity, calmness, and unimpassioned mannerin which he brought
this case before your attention. And
trusting, gentlemen, that, laying aside
every prepossession which may have formerly possessed your mind-every prejudice either against the principles of
that Charter, with the agitation for which
I have been hitherto identified, that I
may, in the course of the remarks which
I shall make in my personal defence
here to-day, secure an anchorage in
your hearts and consciences for that innocence which I believe has characterized my past life, so far as a breach of
the law of my country, and so far as a
vile intention of upsetting the law of that

country are concerned. I stand before
you, gentlemen, charged with the crime
of conspiracy-a crime, the legal definition of which I am utterly unacquainted with. I heard, since my presence in this Court on last Wednesday
morning, that an individual who has
been engaged, in concert with others,
aiding and abetting them, to excite her
Majesty's liege subjects to attempt, forcibly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, to
change the institutions and laws by
which the people of this empire are
governed, is a conspirator. The facts
deposed to before his Lordship and the
jury, are in connection with a certain
delegate meeting which took place on
the 17th of August last, in the town
of Manchester. It is my purpose, gentlemen, to detail to you, shortly, and with
as much brevity as possible, the circumstances connected with my conduct on
that occasion, and then to conclude, with
a brief, but passing, reference to the
circumstances which immediately fol.
lowed. I was elected during the last
Summer Gloucester assizes. The city
of Gloucester is one of the towns I was
sent from to that conference. I represented a meeting, called by a public
placard, and at which meeting upwards
of 2000 were present, among whom
were several legal gentlemen, and a number of the operatives of that city. A
resolution was proposed, seconded, and
carried unanimously, that I should go
to Manchester, for the purpose specified
in the convening notice that was inserted
in the Northern Star of the 13th of
that month, which paper has been
read, and put in before his Lordship
as evidence. After that I went to the
town of Cheltenham, and, at a public
meeting there, I was elected for the same
purpose, to sit at the same conference.
Thence I went to Bristol, and at a public
meeting there, convened by a similar
placard, posted on the walls-a meeting
of which due notice was given to the
authorities of the town,-I was elected
as dt Gloucester. On the Monday morning, preceding the Wednesday on which
this conference met, I departed from
Bristol, and arrived at Manchester the
day following. In Bristol, Gloucester,
and Cheltenham, there was then no strike
or cessation from labour, and, till cog-

272
niant of the circumstances that occurred
inconnection with the origin and progress
of the strike, I had not attempted to excite the people in that locality where I
had been labouring, as a public lecturer,
for three months, to adopt such measures,
seeing that the strike could not be made
acceptable unless it were the spontaneous,
voluntary, and universal desire of the
people to accomplish their object by such
means. These are the circumstances under
which I was brought to this meeting, and
thrown into the immediate vicinity of
those exciting circumstances, and of those
exciting days, to which reference has
been made by several witnesses who have
stood in that box, during the last few
days. Last Christmas, whilst sitting at
the Birmingham conference, I was arrested by a bench-warrant, sent by my Lord
Denman, hurried away like a convict for
felony, and confined in prison for ten
days, subject to nearly the same treatment as a felon, though waiting for bail
on a charge of misdemeanour. Up to the
present moment I have received no notice
for trial in any way, neither have I
pleaded guilty or not] guilty. Whether
my not'having put in any plea, either as
guilty or not guilty, makes my special
and personal case different from the rest
of the defendants or not, I am not aware;
but I have determined, in conjunction with
the rest of my friends the defendants, to
put in my plea of " not guilty," as
being that which I could not do otherwise without violating my conscientious
convictions. The evidence that has been
given against me from that witness box
has been, in my opinion, of a very slight
and flimsy character, and given, too, by
two individuals with whom I have been
formerly acquainted, and with whom I
have been on the strictest terms of private
friendship and intimacy. Judge my surprise, gentlemen, after being the personal
friend of these two men, Cartledge and
Griffin, who stood in that box-judge
my surprise, after years of acquaintance
with these men--judge my surprise, after
having sat with them, slept with them,
eaten with them, sat down to the same
table with them, assisted them in their
poverty and sufferings - after having
shook and grasped their warm hand of
friendship-after having entrusted them
with the innermost feelings of my heart-

after having connected and wound ourselves into one-conceive, if you can,
gentlemen, what must have been my
feelings, when, after the unbroken stream
-the incessant torrent of evidence, which
had been pouring forth f om that box
for four days, these men were brought
up in my presence, and, with bloodless
lips and unmoved countenance, ejaculated
with terms of cold indifference, if not a
positive and palpable falsehood, such
gross and malicious misconstructions
of statements, or one statement at all
events, as totally to change it, and
convey to your minds a statement
totally different from that which was
uttered on the occasion adverted to.
Gentlemen, from the knowledge and confidence I have in the hearts and feelings
and desires of Englishmen and Britons,
I have not the slightest shadow of doubt
that the plain unvarnished tale which I
have given you, will at least set before
you clearly, the circumstances connected
with my being a delegate to that conference, for which I am here arraigned
before this bar as a conspirator, endeavouring to undermine and destroy the
institutions of this country. Did I attempt,-prior to coming to this conference,
to incite the people to cease labour ? Is
there one fact-is there the slightest
shadow of a fact, adduced by either of
those witnesses, or by the police from
any of those three towns, from which I
was sent to the conference, to show that I
used the slightest influence-immense as
that influence was at the time-to cause the
people to cease from their labour ? Were
any of the shops closed in these towns in
consequence of any disturbances that
took place ? Were there any processions
of turn-outs, carrying flags and banners,
and having clubs, sticks, and bludgeons
in their hands ? Not one such fact is
mentioned. I was elected as a delegate
to that conference which met on the 17th
of August, for the simple purpose specified in the special notice put in before
your Lordships, as evidence of the purpose for which that conference was convened. Judge my surprise and astonishment on my arrival at Manchester, to
find that, notwithstanding I had read in
the newspapers reports of the commencement of the strike-to find that it had
been carried to such an extraordinary

273
extent. The only evidence, which I conceive to be evidence at all, and which, no
doubt, will be regarded by the AttorneyGeneral as of great importance, is,
the moving of a certain resolution in
the conference, I am not here to deny
that I moved that resolution, but to admit
fully, clearly, and unequivocally, that I
did move it, and that in moving it I did
that which in the circumstances, and
with my designs, could not be done better, more innocently, and with less offence to the laws of my country. Judge
of a man like myself, who, being inured
from earliest childhood to manual labour
to procure the means of subsistence-a
handloom weaver from the age of ten,
and now but twenty-two years of age;
for the last four years engaged as a public lecturer in connexion with the Chartist movement; and, therefore, could not
but sympathize with the working men.
Ay, this resolution, when it says-" This
conference of delegates from various parts
of England, express their deep sympathy
with their constituents, the working men
now on strike," expresses the genuine
feelings of my heart now as well as then.
Like to my friend Pilling, who has related a soul-harrowing tale of the sufferings of his wife and family, I have been
mixed up with working men, I have been
identified with them, I have seen their
misery, woe, and want, I have witnessed
their physical and mental degradation, I
have seen them subjected to treatment
like that contemplated by a certain gentleman at Stalybridge, who offered a reduction of twenty-five per cent. on their
wages, and therefore I should have
deemed myself the worst apostate from
the principles of humanity that ever wore
a head above his shoulders, or looked at
the sky above his head if I had not expressed my sympathy with the working
men, and if I refused to aid them in that
struggle for better wages, and better remuneration for their labour, and to direct
them to the polar star of that great object
which I had ever in view, the obtaining,
by legal and constitutional means, the
Gentlemen, I will
People's Charter.
read this resolution, and having submitted it to your calm consideration, you
will ask yourselves then, whether there
is anything in it that should lead you to
regard me as a conspirator :-

"Resolution of the Delegates :-That whilst
the Chartist body did not originate the present
cessation from labour, this conference of delegates from various parts of England express
their deep sympathy with their constituents, the
working men now on strike; and that we strongly
approve the extension and the continuance of
their present struggle till the People's Charter
becomes a legislative enactment, and decide
forthwith to issue an address to that effect; and
pledge orirselves, on our return to our respective
localities, to give a proper direction to the people's efforts.
(Signed) JAMES ARTHUR, Chairman.
J. ARRAN, Secretary."
There is one word in this resolution which
the Attorney-General remarked on, to
which I beg your attention. " That we
strongly approve the extension and the
continuance of the present struggle."Struggle, what is the meaning of this
word, and what could be [the purpose of
the Attorney-General in making a particular stop here, and directing particular
attention to this word above all the rest ?
Why, gentlemen, what was the struggle
for ? The first origin of this strike was
at the Staffordshire potteries, where aconservative iron master offered a reduction
of seven shillings a week to his hands.
At Stalybridge a reduction of 25 per
cent. was contemplated. But what was
the cause of the strike at Bolton, Ashton,
Hyde, Mottram, Manchester, Oldham,
Preston, and other places ? Simply a
struggle for better wages. The struggle
had commenced prior to this conferenceprior to the strike we had been elected to
sit in this conference for other purposes
already alluded to; and immediately after we met, it appears from the evidence
given from that box, the workpeople gradually, and continuously, began to return
to the mills. So that, in fact, we rather
sobered down the public feeling than excited it. Instead of flinging a firebrand
among the combustible materials,we flung
oil upon the troubled waters. I have
stated, gentlemen, before, that out of fifty
witnesses, or nearly that number, who
were examined on behalf of the Crown,
only two have offered the slightest evidence against myself. This resolutionwhich, I believe, has been laid before your
lordship, has been put in evidence against
me, and I believe it constitutes the head
and front of my offending. My guilt

1274
consists in nothing more, and nothing
less, than having moved that resolutionlat
the conference to which I have called
your attention on this occasion. Is that
resolution illegal ? That is a question
for you, gentlemen, to decide. The Attorney-General, in opening this case, remarked well, thatthe question was notwhetherotherpartieshad acted aswe did, illegally-this was not what this prosecution was
instituted to prove, but to prove thatwe, the
defendants,actedillegally. But,gentlemen,
I ask you whether you can find an individual guiltyof conspiracy,because itis proved that he attended a public meeting of delegates, of which due notice was given by
placards and by the public newspapers-to
which reporters were admitted, and also
other parties to hear the proceedingscan you as sober, intelligent, calm, and
intellectual Englishmen bring in a verdiet of guilty against the humble individual that stands before you, on such
grounds ? I apprehend not, gentlemen.
I possess not superior tact or talent; I
possess not the power of throwing the varmish orgoldofembellishmentovermy case;
I possess not the power of splitting legal
straws with that acumen which distinguishes gentlemen of the bar-I have all
those advantages opposed to me; but I
rely simply on the plain, naked, and unvarnished facts in contradistinction to the
evidence given against me by Griffin and
Cartledge, both of whom acknowledged
themselves Chartists-both of whom admitted so fully and unequivocally that
they had formerly been in connection
with the Chartist body-one of whom
(Cartledge, I mean) admitted that he was
in that conference, and supported the resolution for which I am arraigned; and
likewise stated that he came to that conference, not with the intent of breaking
the law, or counselling the conference to
do anything that would implicate its
members within the meshes of the law.
Having laid before you the plain and
simple circumstances of my case, and not
:wishing to protract this trial beyond reasonable limits-not wishing to make a
display-conscious of the purity of my
principles and the rectitude of my moSives, I am convinced that, after mature
idliberation, you will bring in a verdict of
"not guilty." And if you do not do so
*if you should bring a verdict against

me, at the same time I shall acquit you,
each and all, of the slightest uncharitable
feeling towards me; believing that an
English jury cannot and will not in the
presence of earth and heaven, and with
the prospect of an everlasting immortality
before them, and a future destiny awaiting them, give in a verdict other than
that supported by evidence, clear, strong,
irrefragable and incontrovertible. Gentlemen, it is my wish likewise, that this
may be the last time I shall be brought
before the bar of my country, for an alleged crime. I have no desire to be
brought into a collision with the law.
During my past life, I never stood either
in the dock or in the witness box. This
is my first time to be arraigned, and as
it is the first I trust likewise it may be the
last; but if a peaceful attachment to. and
advocacy of, the common principles embodied in the People's Charter-if a straightfobrward and persevering agitation on behalf of those principles bring me again
into contact of the law, then, I must
admit that my conscientious conviction of what is right and just, and
due to myself, my country, and posterity, will compel me to take that
line which I have hitherto adopted-will
compel me to take the same line of
policy on future occasions which I
have adopted and pursued on the past.
Though there are many, very many, circumstances in my connection with Ithis
movement which I deplore and regret,
the general and leading features of my
conduct in that agitation convince me,
that, whatever may be the imperfections
and blots of my political escutcheon,
I trust it has not been dishonoured by
I have ever pursued a
hypocrisy.
straight-forward and peaceable, but determined course, while endeavouring to
make the principles of the Charter become the law of the land. If, when
every man's mind is taken aback, and
struck with consternation and horror at
the immense amount of physical force
brought to bear on trade and labourif trade is at a stand, and commerce
stagnated; with the sufferings of the industrious millions before us-if seeing
poverty, and starvation, and mendicancy,
stalking through the streets, if, with all
these facts before us, we should feel
excited, and should, at times, verge

275

into warm and impassioned language, a firm step and unblanehed cheek-with
then, gentlemen, you are to judge of
that language according to the judgment
-delivered by Chief Justice Tindal, at
Stafford, during the late trials at the
special commission. He declared, that
uch language is not only tolerated, under
such circumstances, but is even not
-considered illegal. For there are times,
gentlemen, when, whatever may be our
-attachment to the law, judgment is almost
.overbalanced and overpowered by feeling and passion. If, on this occasion,
many of us may have acted warmly,
energetically, and beyond the strict line!
of prudence, let me intreat of you, gentlemen, fairly to estimate the situation
in which we were placed-the circumstances in which we were placed--that
is, fairly estimate what is for and
against us, and fairly to ascertain as
clearly as the evidence will enable you,
whether or no we have been guilty of a
malicious design to undermine the constitution of the country. We can have
no possible interest in seeking to overturn the constitution. We are placed in
those circumstances that seem to favour
a peaceable and constitutional line of life
and conduct. We desire no blessings as
a class, but those that proceed from the
supreme providence and labour of our
hands; and if we have an interest in
any thing, it is cultivating industry, fostering enterprise, giving additional elasticity to commerce, and striving to inculcate on the present and rising generation
a strict love of justice, morality and
virtue. In the whole course of my agitation did I ever violate these principles ?
In moving the resolution which I hold
in my hand, did I violate the one or the
other ? I contend that this resolution
is strictly legal. 4ccording to the opinion expressed by his Lordship last
evening, (if I did not misunderstand
him) it is at least a moot point-a question that has been discussed, and is still
debateable even amongst the highest
legal authorities, whether a voluntary cessation from labour, or an approval of it,
was legal or illegal. Placing these circumstances before you, and relying on
your impartiality and determination to
do justice, I leave the case in your hands.
If the evidence before you shall convince
you that I a i guilty, I shall walk with

the same unfluttering heart and untrembling hand, to the gates of this prison or
of any other in the kingdom, conscious
that I have done nothing wrong-conscious that in doing what I have done I
have been actuated by the purest and
most sincere motives. If I have acted
illegally, find me guilty; if not, gentlemen, you will be bound to acquit me.
But, if I am found guilty-if I have to
retire within the walls of a prison for
months, though I should exceedingly
regret the circumstance-though I should
extremely regret the painful separation
from mother, sister, brother, and wifethough I should extremely regret this,
and though it will cause me hours
of poignant anguish to reflect that I
have left a weeping wife shedding bitter
and scalding tears over the sod beneath
which lies our departed and only offspring-though I should extremely regret this circumstance, I shall yet feel
supported by the strong and fearless conviction that the cause for which I have
struggled will succeed: that the cause
of right will eventually triumph against
the cause of might, that justice and
plenty will, the one rule the population,
and the other bless the inhabitants of
this sea-girt isle. I leave, brethren, without further remark or observation, the
case in your hands, thanking you for
your kind and impartial attention. If I
be not acquitted, (and I do not wish
to be acquitted except on your judgment
and from the evidence) still I shall feel
that I have not attempted to conspire.that I am not a conspirator. I shall feel
happy in suffering for that which you
may believe to be an infringement of the
laws of the country, but which in my
soul, and before man and the Creator, I
believe to be nothing more or less
than
a sincere and peaceful attempt to carry
on the agitation for the principles of the
People's Charter.
The JUDGE:-Any other defendant?
ALBERT WOLFENDEN: - On
looking over the evidence, I thought the
Attorney-General had no intention whatever of prosecuting me. The circumstances against me are so extremly
trivial, that I can hardly think it his
intention to retain me under this menstrous indictment. I4 would therefore,

276
trouble your Lordship to look over the
evidence put in as a plea to reach me
under this monstrous indictment.
The JUDGE :-If you are asking me
what the evidence is, I will tell you as I
did the others.
WOLFENDEN :-If you please, my
Lord, one of the witnesses who spoke
to me was Buckley, and the other
Brierly.
The JUDGE :-The first witness who
spoke against you was on the first daythe witness Brierly. He mentioned a
meeting on the 14th.-" Sunday forenoon, Camp Field, Mottram Moor,
Stephenson was there. Nothing said
In the afternoon
about the Charter.
Stephenson was in the chair. Wolfenden
began to lecture. Both mentioned the
Charter.
Wolfenden mentioned the
Charter." I don't think he [the witness]
mentioned anything more. The next
witness who mentioned your name is
Buckley.
The meeting he speaks to
took place on the 12th of August at
Stalybridge, at seven o'clock in the morning. " Crossley, Fenton, and Wolfenden
were there. Crossley and Fenton advised
them to stick to the wage question. Wolfenden told them to stick to the Charter."
In the evening there was another meeting.
you were not there. Then, it was proved,
yesterday, by the witness, Hanley, that
the meeting of the trades' delegates adjourned to Carpenters' Hall; the chair
was taken by Alexander Hutchinson.
Present, M'Cartney, Taylor, Morrison,
Woodruffe, from Ashton, and Wolfenden, from Ashton. Speeches were made.
Duffy complained that the Anti-corn
Law League were the originators of the
disturbances. There is no other evidence
against you.
WOLFENDEN:-My Lord, and
gentlemen of the jury, the reason why
I thought the charge in the indictment
could not be pressed against me, was,
first, that the individual who was in the
chair at that meeting (Wilde) was discharged; and next that, he who was
represented, and sworn to as being a
delegate with me at that conference of
trades' delegates, is also discharged.
Under these circumstances I thought
the Attorney-General could not do less
than let me off also.

The JUDGE :-Who do you allude
to as being discharged ?
WOLFENDEN:-Thomas Pitt.
The JUDGE :-He is not sworn to.
He is not mentioned as being in that
meeting.
WOLFENDEN:-I was under the
impression that the Attorney-General
would not press the case, inmless he
had some other positive reason for
doing so, which reason is not pointed out
in the evidence against me. I never
conspired to injure any party in society,
nor any individual. If it be a conspiracy to acknowledge certain principlesI believe I recommended them with moderation, and I laboured to prevent the
people from breaking the peace-if that
be conspiracy, so far I do acknowledge,
gentlemen, that I am a conspirator. But
I feel persuaded that you cannot convict
me on the evidence of such a man as
Brierly, his character stamps him at once
with infamy. He acknowledged here,
that he received money for the purpose
of obtaining a conviction. Gentlemen, I
labour under considerable disadvantage,
both from poverty and want of learning,
in contending against the array of learning and talent against me. I could bring
forward witnesses to prove that I never
was at Mottram-moor on the 13th of
August.
The JUDGE :-On the 14th.
WOLFENDEN:-I understood from
the depositions taken that this meeting
was on the 8th, perhaps some misunderstanding occurred in the swearing of the
witness, but a meeting took place on the
8th. Evidence was produced from Ashton-under-Lyne, in order to impress on
this court, that it was a Chartist question
which was then agitated. I do declare
before God and you that the whole of the
documents and placards made use of in
the towns of Ashton and Stalybridge,
never once as much as mentioned, the
name of the Charter. I do not deny the
principles of the Charter; I would sooner
suffer-I would be ready to undergo any
punishment-I would not forego to declare those principles for any consideration, but this charge of conspiring to uproot society and destroy the government
by illegal means, I do deny with the greatest asseveration.
Every circumstance
connected with the locality from whence

277
I came, would prove that no such thing
as a Chartist conspiracy did exist. The
whole of the arrangements, everything
connected with the matter, the delegation
and instruction of the delegation; and
every arrangement of the delegate meetings, were directly, purely and strictly in
connection with the trades. I do presume
that an expression, that I was favorable
to the principles of the Charter, that I was
ready to support those principles constitutionally, when called upon, is not a
crime. I am innocent even of the appearance of the crime charged against me,
and I cannot discover from anything that
has been stated in that box why my name
is retained in this indictment. But the
character of Buckley, who is the principle evidence against me, must have a
deadening effect against gaining a conviction. That man declared, that I supported the Charter, and that I said
much against the mill-owners and manufacturers. In another court of judicature he declared that this was the language
I used :-that they were the greatest
enemies of the working classes, who
under any circumstances were the cause
of breaking the peace; and that if they
would achieve any great and good object
it must be with strict attention to peace,
law and order. This very witness declares from that box, that he told his
mother-in-law, Susan Green, that if it
were not for the speakers, there would be
much more mischief done. But there
was no mischief done. I never saw
any mischief done. I was acquainted
with no circumstance of riot. I did all I
possibly could in order to support the
peace. I do say that the best thanks
ought to be given to those who took part
in these proceedings from the manly
manner in which they restrained the
manufacturing operatives from those acts
of violence, which, from the sufferings

of the Charter, then I am guilty of a
crime, which nothing can move, but conviction from argument. My Lord, and
gentlemen of the jury, as you have had so
longa sitting, and must have suffered much
inconvenience, I shall not at this late hour
of the day trespass further on your time.
JAMES LEACH: - My Lord,
and gentlemen of the jury, after this
long and painful investigation - after
bringing into this court evidence from
all parts of this county, and some from
the adjoining counties, how little,
indeed, has been laid before the jury
and this court, to prove what was the
cause of those results which brought us
here before this bar. I perceive, my
Lord and gentlemen, that so far as my
name is mixed up with this matter, there
is very little evidence. There is not the
slightest reference whatever to any meeting I have attended; my name was
never mentioned in court till this investigation was going on for nearly three
days. After all the meetings and speeches
you have heard about, and all the turmoil, agitation, confusion, and disorder
that have occurred, it turns out, on the
evidence, that I was only present at one
meeting-the conference meeting, as it
was called-and for that I am here. I
am here to answer, on a charge of conspiracy, simply and solely for attending
that meeting. But, myLord and gentlemen
of the jury, it shall be my province here
to introduce to your notice that which I
believe to be the real conspirator-those
circumstances which I believe had the
effect of producing that wide spread of
discontent -that seems to have been felt
with the oneness of feeling and sympathy,
and to have displayed itself under such appearances, that it was at length brought
before the notice of this Court. We are
charged with conspiring together to produce discontent, disaffection,disorder, and

which they had endured and the exciting confusion in society, with a view forcibly to

change the institutions of the country, and
with a view to the enforcing the adoption
of those principles, said to be inimical to
the public weal and tranquillity of her
Majesty's liege subjects. But it is not
easy, my Lord and gentlemen, to persuade people, well fed and clothed, that
they are naked and hungry neither is
the Attorney-General, I have not trans- it in our power to produce' on the minds

circumstances in which they were placed,
they were likely to commit. I do contend, my Lord, and gentlemen of the
jury, that so far as I have been concerned
in the matter, I have acted purely and
solely in the character of a peace-maker,
and as such I claim your indulgence if I
have transgressed. On the principle of

pressed.

If it be a crime to be in favour of the people,

discontent

with th insti-

278
4ntheir own
ftions of the ountry,
position, had those institutions, and that
position, been what they ought to be.
On the contrary, the labouring classes of
England would look with jealousy and
suspicion on any one who would endeayour to produce discontent ainong them,
if they were receiving a fair remuneration for their productions and the labour
of their hands. But we are charged with
being the originators of that, with which
any one acquainted with the history of
the last few years, knows we can have
nothing to do. It is true we have taken
some part in agitating this question, (the
Charter) not only among the lower classes
but also among the higher ranks of society. This question is now discussed
with an earnestness which shews that the
time is not far off when the people of
this country must have such changessuch an alteration in the institutions of
this counntry as will guarantee to labour
that protection which it so imperatively
demands, and which, in my opinion, must
be conceded before there is anything like
a return to that state of happiness, and
contentment, which every well regulated
mind must desire to see established and
adopted. You have had many witnesses
placed in that box, and I was much surprised you had not more of them; for
when I was brought before the magistrates
several other witnesses were examined,
whose evidence was thought important.
Why were not they produced in court?
Why was not their evidence produced?
You have had a placard produced here.
When before the magistrates it was stated
that that placard was at my door, and a
witness was brought up who swore that
he saw me in my shop, and a great crowd
of people at the door discussing the merits
of the placard. That witness is not now
in court. Why ? Because the prosecutors knew he was not swearing the truth.
He also swore to another meeting which
he said I attended, and at which I used
seditious language. Why is he not here
now to swear to that language and that
meeting, gentlemen of the jury ? Simply
and solely because I had the means of
producing in that box incontrovertible
evidence that I was not at that meeting
at which he swore I had used seditious
language. What then has been prodiced to criminate me ini this charge of

conspiracy? Cartledge and Griffin said
I was at Mr. Scholefield's chapel on the
17th of August. A vast deal of evidence
might have been spared here. If the
Attorney-General had asked us that question he might not have brought forward
so many witnesses to prove it. We
would have admitted the fact. But a
certain resolution was passed at that
meeting, and for that resolution we are
to be charged as conspirators. What
are the words on which so much stress
has been laid ? " We approve of the
present struggle." Why, the word struggle is so familiar to the people of this
country-so often put before them-so
interwoven with all their political associations, that you can scarcely think of
speaking of anything without using the
word.
Here is a document headed
" STRUGGLE," [The defendant exhibited one of the publications of the
Anti-corn-law League] and the strength
of the language from beginning to end
of this, far exceeds any thing ever
used by the Chartist body, either in
their resolutions or placards. But there
is no proof here that I was elected
to sit in that conference. I was there as
any other individual who of his own
accord thought proper to go there. But
what is it that occasioned this vast uneasiness-this terror and wide spread rancour
and discontent which had pervaded the
country ? What is it, I would ask, that
has produced that ? Is it the Chartist
conference in Manchester ? It could not
be the Chartist conference, because notice
was given of that assembly some seven
or eight weeks before anything occurred.
You had a man put into that box who
told you that he paid the same wages to
his hands now that. hlie paid twentyfive years ago; and he would have you
to infer from that, that the people had no
reason to complain of the distress or poverty afflicting the working classes at the
time to which he referred. Now what
are the facts? I shall not attempt to
lead you into all the details of that heartrending system that is ruining the labouring classes of Englishmen, and bringing
sorrow and even insolvency on a vast
number even of the middle classes them.
selves. I hold it to be true, that wherever
the labouring classes of any country in
the world are in a state of distress and

279

destitution-wherever they are notenjoying a portion of that which their own
labour creates, the social pillar on which
the superstructure of society is raised is
in danger. Where a population are rendered ragged and discontented in the
midst of the abundance they created,
there never can be anything like security for the property of the rich, or
content for those who ought to bring contentment to the hearth-stone of every cottager in the land. I need not attempt to
bring any details before you, for you
know as well as I do that at this moment
nine-tenths of the labouring classes of
England are in a state of insecurity, poverty, and wretchedness. What are the
opinions of those who have spoken on
this subject ? I need not ask. Her
Majesty herself says, in her speech from
the throne, that she much deplores the
distress that exists among her subjects.
The House of Lords acknowledges the
truth that the people are starving in the
midst of plenty. The House of Commons acknowledges the distress which
pervades all classes of society. The
Church itself had acknowledged the distress, and the Lords Spiritual had lately
published a form of prayer, and sent over
-the country a sort of letter, enjoining the
ministers of the gospel to solicit subscriptions from their respective congregations to relieve the distresses of the people
in their several districts. How, then,
can we be the cause of the turmoil and
discontent with which we are here
Well, then, we will be
charged ?
told that, if we did not create it, we
took advantage of it. What evidence
have you to prove that we took an undue
,advantage of this strike ? It is said that
this was a conspiracy. Can it, after hearing the evidence on the part of the Crown,
be said for a moment to bear anything of
th4t character? What is the real history
of this strike ? I do not remember the day,
but I recollect the circumstance well, for
I live near that part of the town which
the people first reached when they came
from Ashton, and invaded Manchester.
What were they ? A few drabbled half4tarved creatures, and half wet, chiefly
'women and children, came to Manchester,
an4d, in about five hours afterwards,
aupwards of 160,000 people were in the
streets. So vast a number of people

could not have collected so suddenly,
if it were not that they sympathized with
the wrongs which they endured in common with the operatives from Ashton.
Could it be believed for a moment that
a few people coming from the mills where
they were half-sweated to death, could
stop the mills, mechanics' shops, iron
founders, and cause every description of
labour to stand still in that line of industry, as you were told by one of the learned counsel who addressed you ? No, the
real truth is this; discontent and penury
created a oneness of action among the
working classes, and when notice was
given that the small remnant of wages was
about to be made less, they thought it better to starve and play, than work and
starve at the same time. What was the
question asked by the magistrate at Manchester ? '" hy do you not go to work ?"
-" Ah !" said they, "we are deprived
of a fair remuneration for our labour, and
the consequence is, we are starving." But
the witness in the box yesterday said, there
was no alteration in the wages of the
working classes. His lordship thought
that the improvements in machinery were
such as gave to the working man the advantage of that improvement; but what
are the real facts of the case Why, the
wages have been cut down to one-half
of what they were twenty-five years ago.
In the county of Lancaster the wages of
any given number of hands engaged in
the cotton trade have been cut down to less
than one-half what they were twenty-five
years ago. But how many thousands of
the people have been turned upon the
streets withoutany wagesatall ? In twenty
of the largest mills in Manchester, which
in the year 1825 employed 1,018 spinners, there are now only 500 spinners, so
that the improvements in machinery have
had the effect of turning more than onehalf the hands out of employment since
1825, and also of diminishing the wages
of the remainder fifty per cent. Some
of the operatives once employed in those
factories are now going about the streets
selling salt, gathering rags, and shouting
ballads. Othersare sent, under the direction
of the commissioners, to sweep the streets
of Manchester for a few shillings a week.
But even that is no sanctuary for them,
for a machine has been invented which
sweeps the street and throws the dirt into

280
the cart at the same time. These men
'had profitable employment before the alterations introduced by machinery. These
are the causes of the distress which now
afflicts a great portion of the labouring
casses of the country. But not only
lhas one half of the hands been thrown
out of employment in the same twenty
,mills, but 144,878 spindles in the aggregate have been added since 1825. There
is a large body of printers in Lancashire,
-and what is their condition ? At the
Bury-ground Print-works, near Bury,
twenty years ago, 100 men were getting
thirty shillings a week for printing calico
c:loth. These men were happy at that
time. What is the result now ? Instead
of 100 getting each thirty shillings a
-week, there are only eleven employed
altogether now, three out of the eleven
have only three shillings and sixpence a
week each, three more have ten shillings
a week each, and the other five are getting something like reasonable wages. It
is not that there has been any diminution
in labour or commerce, that these men
were thrown out of employment. No,
on the contrary, more pieces are now
turned off by four machines, than would
give successful and continuous employnent to 400 hands, if it were not for the
iuve ntion of those machines. The trade
has increased from one to fourfold, while
these men are diminished from 100 getting thirty shillings each to eleven, six
of whom are only getting ten shillings,
and three boys attending them at three
shillings and sixpence each. I see from
a petition sent from the block printers,
that their numbers are 7,000, 4,000 of
The
whom are out of employment.
question the same body put last year to
Sir Robert Peel was simply this, "What
-are we to do ? Machinery has taken from
us our employment; we have no other
description of employment to fall back
upon, and what is to become of us? Are
we to conclude that machinery, made of
iron and wood, is to be considered by the
legislature of more importance than the
flesh, blood, and bone of those whose labour it has supplanted ? Are we to consider that there is to be no protection for
us; that we are thus to suffer; and 'that
there is to be no commiseration for that
,deep and wide-spread distress from those
.who have thus taken away our la-

bour, and are giving us nothing in return ?" And because we speak of these
things to what conclusions do they arrive who do not take the same view of the
subject that we do P "Ah," they say,
"you are revolutionists-you seek to destroy property ;" but there is a great distinction between the people destroying
property, and the people endeavouring to
prevent property from destroying them.
There is a distinction between the use
and the abuse of anything. The people
never think of destroying property. I
have seen thousands and tens of thousands of persons congregated in Lancashire at different periods, but I never saw
them destroying property. It is true that
boys and girls occasionally pelted stones
and broke windows of mills, but I never
saw the men do so. They know that it
is labour which gives to property its
value-they know that it is valueless
without the labour of their hands; and
they never will commit such a suicidal
act as to destroy that to which the labour
of their own hands has given its value.
But I cannot accord the same praise to
the middle classes, who, in the foolish career of taking from time to time the
wages of the working classes from them,
are effectually undermining the only pillar on which property can rest for security. What is the present state of Manchester ? By a report which I have lately
seen, I find there are 3000 empty cottage
houses, and 3000 more which pay no
rents. And why ? Because the working
classes do not receive such remuneration
for their labour, as will enable them to
occupy houses of their own. These are
the causes of the discontent. It is from
these sources that outbreaks, turmoils and
confusion occasionally spring forth, and I
trust these causes will be investigated. I
presume this is the subject connected
with the present enquiry. We are charged
here with doing that with which we have
no more to do than the people on the
other side of the globe. We had nothing
whatever to do with the late insurrection.
It is a notorious fact, and one that cannot
be denied, and which can be proved in
this Court, and will be proved before this
investigation is over, that the parties instrumental in bringing us here were
themselves the parties who concocted that
strike, with the view of forcing the legis.

281
lature to adopt those views which they
thought would be beneficial to their own
interests. The evidence in that box was
asked for my character-( did not ask
it from them, for I would not accept it
from such a source) and they stated that
I was respected by all parties in the
town were I was best known. Does that
look like a conspirator-to be respected
by all parties ? I don't think I have any
enemies. I know a considerable body of
men who differ from me, but they pay
me respect and deference. And, why ?
because they always heard me during
any agitation or confusion that might
reign in the town-exhort the people to
pay the greatest deference to the opinions
of others, and at all times to reason, as
men ought to reason, and that, when
they discovered that a certain opinion
was erroneous, it was their interest to
abandon it, and establish that which was
right, and bring about after conviction,
what might be necessary for the common
weal and interest of society. Those men
who swore that I was a conspirator gave
me that character. I don't know, gentlemen of the jury, that so much could be
said for themselves. I trust they also
have such a good character, but they will
have to purge themselves from much
wickedness before they get such a character, as they have given me. But I
have called your attention to the distress
of the working classes, to show the real
cause of the disturbances. What is the
state of Stockport ? Four years ago this
question was mooted and discussed in the
Town Hall, before a meeting of the ratepayers-" Whether shall the poor-rate
that is to be levied be four-pence halfpenny or sevenpence in the pound P" It
was carried that the rate should be sevenpence in the pound. Now, here is the
next fact. Within the last four years,
the reductions of wages, with the stopping of mills, had had the effect, according to the masters themselves, of withdrawing from circulation, as wages,
£1,600 a week, less than was paid to the
working classes five years ago. What
are the rate payers now discussing ?
Not whether the poor-rates shall be fourpence halfpenny or sevenpence, but whether they shall be three shillings and sixpence or four shillings and sixpence in
the pound. Thus, whenever the wages

of industry diminish-wherever the
means are taken from the producers of
wealth, it follows, as a natural consequence, that the reduction in wages
must fall back in some shape or
way upon the property of the middle
classes.
Are not we right, then, in
stating, that this is the cause of
the discontent. As Englishmen, is it
too much for us to say, that we have
a right to attend public meetings, to
speak at them, and pass resolutions
at them, as long as those resttiu-..
tions have no tendency to injure pro--.
perty or life, or to interfere with the
established order of things, or, the peace
of society ? No doubt you will be told
that that was not the result of our resolution. I think, however,, there will be
great difficulty in proving to you that
any other result has followed from these
proceedings. I have not seen it attempted to be proved,, that any thingof
a painful nature has followed as a consequence of the passing of this resolu-.
tion. All the excitement is raked up,
and laid to our charge, as if we first
caused the distress, and then complained
of its existence. I see my Lord Stanhope is now made the chairman of a
society, established for the sole purpose
of giving encouragement to native industry. What is the inference to be
drawn from that? There is but one
inference, that the labouring classes of
England, who produce the wealth that
adorns our country, are themselves in a
state of wretchedness and destitution, in.
consequence of their labour being exported to foreign lands, while they themselves are left naked and ragged for want.
it inof that which they produced. Is we not
notorious that, in proportion as
creased our productions, the working.
people sank down into wretchedness and
want ? At this very moment the agricultural labourers are piningand getting
a very scanty portion of food, in the
midst of the vast accumulation of the
produce of their own labour. In proportion as they have thus multiplied
what ought to have given blessings to all,
they are themselves in want, woe, and
sorrow. Is it not a truth, that, while
the warehouses of Manchester are at this
moment ready to break down with the
superabundant weight of the goods piled

282
in them, the result of the slavery and -only offspring of-labour." Labour theretoil of the industrious classes of England, fore is the foundation of property It
those who produced the cloth have not, follows then, that those who enjoy prothemselves, .a, decent suit of clothes to perty should look with respect to, and do
put on their backs, and cannot attend a justice to, those who produce property.

place of worship on Sundays, because The working classes are entitled to have

they are in rags, and would be despised that at their hands. The great mass of
by the better classes ? Is it not a the working classes believe that those
truith that the poor hand-loomt weaver, who possess property have neglected the
whose useful toil produces 'all those duties annexed to it, that those who make

splendid garments worn by his superiors the laws and frame the institutions, and
in society, is slaving from morning to legislate under the constitutional authonight, with scarcely a shirt upon his rity of kings, lords, and commons, have
back, scarcely a bed to rest his weary
limbs upon, scarcely clothing to cover
the bodies of his children, or a proper
meal to eat from Monday morning to
Saturday night, -from year end to year
end ? How is it possible, then, with a
population like this, that contentment
can reign amongst this order of our
fellow-creatures, so long as this is the
result,-increased labour and toil, diminished means, and increasing sorrow
anid destitution ? These are the real
causes of the discontent. Gentlemen
of the jury, you may convict me of
being a conspirator fr complaining
of these things; you may by your verdict send me along with others to a dungeon for a time, but rest assured that,
whether that may be the result or not,
there will be a continuation of the murmuring and discontent, ard of those very
justifiable complaints, till the cause be
removed, by protecting, in some way or
other, the industry of the people, which
makes all the property we have gi-eat and
valuable. The Attorney-General insisted
in his opening address that property
could not be secure if we were allowed
to go on in our wild course, endangering
the social fabric and bringing confusion
into society. Gentlenmen, the cause I
mentioned is the real instigator to conspiracy and sedition, or whatever else
you may call it. Property will be best
respected when those who possess it do
their duty to those who created it. We
have it placed on record by the first
writers of the day, that property has no
exchangeable value, but that which labour gives it. Then labour must have
justice done it in order t0'strengthen and
give value to propety itself. There is
nto sentence which I ever read that I ap-

not done their duty to the working
classes. Hence they have very loudly
and incessantly proclaimed that truth;
and, I would admit, rather turbulently
demanded a repeal of those institutions
so as to be admitted within the pale
But, gentlemen
of the constitution.
of the jury, this is the first time that
ever my name was ushered into a
court of justice on a charge of conspiracy. And what has been told to the
jury? Why, that M'Douall was seen at
my house. Well, in the midst of all our
follies, I trust it is not a crime to be hospitable. He came to my house, and he
had a perfect right to do so. I respect
him, as I do many others who come to
my house as a friend, and I consider that
it was no sin or evil on my part to admit
him, and allow him to stay there as long
as I liked. Next to that, I was traced
to Noblett's house, where I was in the
habit of going for three or four years, and
which I have resorted to since. I was there
once or twice a week since I was set at
liberty, after being arrested on this charge.
Was anything illegal proved as having
occurred between me and Dr. M'Douall
on this occasion ? Then comes the Executive Placard; there is not a tittle of
evidence to show that I had anything to
do with this placard, except that it was
posted at my door I shall put into the
box the man who made me the board on
which that placard was posted, and who
saw the bill-poster putting the placard at
the door. They posted those placards
not only at printers, but even at the barbers' shops. They put bills there announcing what is to be sold by auction,
the contents of newspapers, meetings that
are to be held, lectures that are to be
given, &c. These bill-stickers are sent

prove of more than that; ',property is the round the town' to postthose bills oth

283
boards* wallsv and such places. ThenIy connection ever attempted to be
proved between me and that placard was
simply that I allowed it to be on a board
at my door; and you have it from Beswick and the other officer who came to
arrest me, that they had reason to believte I was not at home when that placard
was put ip at my door Then, what am
I here for ? Is it for attending the conference meeting? If that be a crime,
then of that crime I plead guilty. But I
do not plead guilty to the foul charge of
'Bnspiracy for attending that meeting
My whole life gives the lie to any such
charge. There is not a man that would
be brought from Manchester but could
give evidence, in that box, that I would
never conspire to change the laws and
institutions of the country, by force and
violence. Gentlemen of the jury, I
have as much reason to guard myself
against such things as these as any
man in the court. I have a large
family to provide for, and I trust I
have the feelings which a father ought
to have for his children. I should think
myself unworthy of the name of manI should despise myself if I concocted
schemes to shed blood, or bring about
disorder or confusion in society. My
feelings revolt from the idea of concocting any private conspiracy to bring about
.disorder or confusion, or anything bad.
No, my desire always was to inspire my
fellow men with feelings of brotherly
love and affection, one man with another. I have always advised the adoption of peaceable means, for the purpose
of effecting those changes which will
so mould the institutions of the country,
that protection may be given to industry
as well as to that which industry creates.
It is for this reason that I have taken the
part I was able to take in the proceedings of the Chartist body. In Manchester we have an agitation of a very strong
and violent character indeed. I have
seen there a band of ruthless ruffians
parading the streets like military, with
bludgeons in their hands; hailing the police as countrymen. These fellows sought
to take my life,-they sought to destroy that
semblance of protection left us by the
laws. I have seen a mob of ruthless
barbarians, who were panting for the lives
qf their fellow-workmen, addressed by

1the policemen of Manchester, in th6es

words: "Fellow-countrymen, do your
duty, and we won't interfere with you."*
I have seen heads broken, and blood
trickling down to the shoes of men
whose heads were almost split by those
ruthless savages, who were carrying out
this system of violence for party purposes,
and party purposes alone. I have, in
many cases, risked my personal safety
for the'purpose of restoring such men to
a more orderly state, and bringing life
and property, and the opinions of others,
into respect. After all, I am arraigned
here as a conspirator. Well, be it so.
Rely upon this, that no time ever will
arrive-it is impossible to expect itwhen the labouring classes will sit down
contented with slavery and starvation at
the same time. It is impossible to expect that they will ever be contented in
rags and wretchedness, while surrounded
by the abundance and superfluities that
their own labour created.
They will
never be content to see these things consumed, even wasted by others, while they
themselves are wanting even the scantiest
portion of that which they themselves
created. In conclusion, I cannot say, as
some have said, that I look with indifference to your decision. I do look with
a great deal of anxiety to your decision,
not only as it regards my personal safety,

but on still more important grounds. I
look with anxiety for your decision, because I am satisfied that, from the nature
and character of the evidence you have
had in that box, and contrasting that
evidence with the lives of the men whose
conduct you are here to investigate and
try-considering the excitement that prevailed at the time of the strike-and that,
after that conference which was talked
so much about, the people returned
quietly to their employment as soon as
they were allowed (for I happen to know
that in many instances, when they begged
* The speaker here alludes to the Anti-corn
law meeting in Stephenson's-square, in 1841,
where the Irish bludgeon-men of the Anti-cornthe
law League, and the Irish police, min presence
of Corn-law repealing magistrates, assailed the
Chartists in a most brutal and ferocious manner,
for daring to express their opinions on the resolutions submitted to the meeting.

284
to be allowed to return to work, the reply
was, 4' No; yourmonth is not up yet;
you shall have a month's holiday").
Believing from the patient and kind attention you have paid to all that you
heard, things irrelevant as well as relevant, I am satisfied you will, by your
verdict, tell the Government and the
world that we are not those monsters and
conspirators who wanted to bring about,
by confusion and disorder, a change in
the institutions of the country. Thanking you, gentlemen, for your attention,
and hoping you will give me that verdict
of acquittal which I fully deserve at your
hands, I leave the case with you, hoping

that, as Englishmen, you will give me
that which you are bound to award me
on this occasion.
Mr. O'CONNOR said he believed he
was now the last of the defendants who
had to address the jury.
The JUDGE asked if no other defendant wished to address the jury in his
own defence ? No answer was returned.
Mr. O'CONNOR then asked his Lordship to allow the Court to adjourn to the
following morning.
The JUDGE at once consented, and
the Court adjourned at half-past six
o'clock.

END OF SIXTH DAY'S

TRIAL.

TRIAL OF FEARGUS O'CONNOR, ESQ.
AND OTHERS.

SEVENTH

DAY,

Wednesday, .March 8th, 1843.

At nine o'clock, as soon as Mr.
BARON ROLFE had taken his seat on
the bench,
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR rose
and said,-May it please your Lordship;
gentlemen of the jury; before I enter
into the consideration of this case, allow
me to add my meed of praise to that
which has already been bestowed upon
the manner in which this trial has been
conducted from its beginning to the
Gentlemen of the
present moment.
jury, we have no right to complain; we
have no fault to find; and therefore we
do not complain. I do not look upon
this prosecution as an act of justice, or
of leniency or mercy merely; I go further, and say that I look upon it as regards myself as an act of grace. Gentlemen of the jury, after the evidence
you have heard, if your verdict upon
that evidence were a verdict of guilty, it
would not convey to the public mind of
this country half that criminality which,
before this trial commenced, was attached
to my character. Before this investigation commenced, the press of all parties
teemed with the importance of the case;
that it was one little short of high treason,
and that I, Feargus O'Connor, was the
prime mover in the several transactions
connected with it. I am well aware that
it is impossible for me altogether to remove all those prejudices which for years
have been engendered in your minds. I
do not seek to perform such Herculean
labour; but if you leave that box with
less prejudice against my character than
you entertained when you first took your
seats there, then will I have achieved a
greater triumph than even your verdict
of acquittal would give me. Gentlemen,

you have heard several of the poor defendants speak disrespectfully of your
verdict-that is, disregardingly of it, but
they only comparatively disregarded it,
but, gentlemen, if I destroy your predudices, though the law tells you that I
ought to be found guilty upon the evidence, I shall hail your verdict of guilty
We are now to come
as a triumph.
back, after this long and rambling investigation, to the consideration of the real
question; and out of the multiplicity of
evidence thrown down before you, all
mixed together, it will be my dutythough considerably relieved, however,
in consequence of the analysis made by
my Lord-to endeavour to bring your
minds back to the consideration of the
real question. In a prosecution of this.
kind, we may naturally suppose the Attorney-General, on behalf of the crown,
would lay his whole case before you; and
that he would support it, not by such
evidence as has been given, but by the best
that could be adduced. I admit that the
opening speech of the Attorney-General
was what that of a lawyer and a gentleman always should be; it was a very different speech from what we have been
accustomed to hear on such occasions;
but, taking it without contrast, and by
itself, it was the speech of a lawyer and a
gentleman. I agree with the AttorneyGeneral, that an investigation was not
only necessary, but indispensable. After
the state which it is proved to you this
country was in for a considerable time,
the Attorney-General would be justly
charged with a dereliction of his duty*
if he had not had this solemn inquiry in a
Court of justice. But another question
follows that-whether or not the right

286
parties are before you; and that is a
question which will afterwards be submitted to you. What is the nature of the
crime with which we have been charged ?
What is the reason that you, gentlemen,
in the course of these proceedings, have
been compelled to confess yourselves
somewhat puzzled with this heap of conspiracies, assemblies, tumults, riots, and
different crimes, so mingled together that
his Lordship has had considerable trouble in laying it before you in a clear
manner-clear to me but not clear to you
and the rest of the defendants-for there
has been a heap of charges so mixed up
together that it is impossible for any defendant to justify himself against them?
Then, they are not more remarkable for
the period over which they range,-embracing not less than two months,-than
for the various transactions to which they
refer. If these transactions and charges
had been brought before you in a legitimate way; if rioters had been indicted
for riot; if those who attended tumultuous and illegal meetings had been indicted for that offence; and those guilty
of conspiracy for conspiracy; then, gentlemen, your troubles would be limited
and your course contracted; each defendant would have known what he was
called upon to justify. But now, after
having ferreted throughout the whole
country ; having first produced their case
before the magistrates, and having substantiated it there by the witnesses they
cidled; there has not a single witness by
whom it was substantiated in the first instance been produced in this court. We
are first committed, and then there is a
perambulation throughout the country
for evidence; we are first indicted, and
then there is a crusade to see what they
can rake up to substantiate the charge.
Conspiracy, to speak of it first; what is
it? A definable thing, a fact; and the
moment parties combine to do an illegal,
act, or to do a legal act by illegal means,
that moment the crime is pertfected. It
does not require from the 1st of August
to the 1st of October to complete that
crime. But it has been thought desirable
and necessary to prove a variety of acts,
such as illegal meetings, in order to substantiate the charge of conspiracy. Now,
as far as it regards conspiracy, there is no
e idence yet before you to prove that the

defendants have been guilty of that crime.
His Lordship will tell you what amount
of evidence is required by law to prove
conspiracy against any party. There
must not only be a common design, but
also a privity of that common design;
and all the acts of the parties must be in
pursuance of that common design; and
every conspirator must go to the extent
that the other conspirators go, in the furtherance of that common design. This
will be laid before you by my Lord, and
therefore it is the more unnecessary for
me to dwell upon it at any considerable
length. But let us see, in the first instance, how and by whom the entire case
is proved. The Attorney-General, in his
opening speech, said that the charge
against us is that of having attempted to
force a change in the laws of this country
by tumult and riot-by tumult and riot.
Gentlemen, there might have been some
doubt as to the complexion which this
prosecution bore, up to the period of the
acquittal of Wilde. There was a desire
on the part of the Crown to evade the
evidence of their own witnesses on the
part of the strike of labour. I could not
discover, for the life of me, why the Crown
sought to gloss this case, and to put a
new face upon it; but when I found on
the second day that the Attorney-General
admitted XTyilde's innocence and consented to a verdict of acquittal, because
he found he had not mentioned the Charter, then I came to the conclusion for
the first time that this was a political
trial, and that the Attorney-General
was determined, whatever the evidence
might be,-no, not the Attorney-General-let it not be supposed that I lay
this at the door of the Attorney-General,
but those who got up the evidence presented to the magistrates in the first
instance, corroborating the fact that it
was a strike for wages-none of the
witnesses who were brought before the
magistrates have been called here; but
a different class of witnesses are now
called here to prove a completely different
conspiracy. That is an important fact,
and one which, I trust, you will bear in
mind. Then,gentlemen, we are charged
with a conspiracy on the 17th of August.
Upon this branch of the case, as I am'
more immediately concerned than any

other, I think I may very briefy deti

287
with it. [ am charged with having magistrates ? Where are the aldermen ?
escited and recomidended the cotinu- Whre is Sit Charles- Saw ? Where
ancie of the strike then itt existence. is Mr. Made? Whee is Col.Wemyss?
Gentlemen of the jury, factsi are stub- Where is Captain Sleigh.? Where were
blrn things; and, thanks to the At- those who saw all, antd could have spoke
torney-General, and to that ingenuous- :to all ? No where. The crown could
ness which has marked his character have produced them; they have failed :
The evidence that
through life, he, before he commenced I shall do so.
or called any evidence, should have been brought to substanthe prosecution,
acquitted me of every charge in the tiate the case, I shall produce to answer
indictment. Up to the time of the strike, the case. This is an anomaly. This is
he not only acquits me of all cognizance a charge of conspiracy; the country is
and participation in it, but he goes all but in a state of revolution; yet
further, and bore honourable testimony mind (as the Attorney-General will tell
to the fact, that I have resisted it. you in his reply), we are not charged
Gentlemen, at the period I resisted it- with producing a bloody revolution.
the 13th of August-to which period No; but we are charged with a crime
the Attorney-General brings down his which, if I were guilty of, I should blush
character of me, I inserted, in the .Nor-to stand up and defend myself against it
thern Star, an article which strongly in a court of justice. There is someinculcated the necessity of observing thing appalling to an honourable mind
peace, law, and order; and that article, in the charge of conspiracy; it implies
gentlemen, was again inserted in the not only secrecy, but the secret machiNorthern Star of the 20th of August- nations of bad men to destroy somethe very publication which the Attorney- thing belonging to good men: it is the
General has put in evidence against me. most abominable of all crimes. But,
But let us see what this conspiracy was, I ask, where are those parties ? They are
how it was carried on, and what are the no where. Then what is proved by the
documents referred to in the opening Siamese youths ? this, that the delegate
speech of the Attorney-General, and meeting was called two months before
afterward read in evidence, what they the strike took place; we have it proved
relate to, and what their nature is; whe- by Cartledge that it was an open meeting;
ther justifiable and legal, or not. Gen- and that a reporter, dismissed from my sertlemen, you have it in evidence from vice, and not reporting for my paper alone,
the two principal witnesses for the Crown butfobrthe British Statesman,an otherpa-from whom the poor defendants would pers, was admitted. We have it proved,
not condescend to receive a character, that there was no interruption to any one;
but felt themselves dishonoured and and this is supported by the evidence of
lessened in their own estimation by the first policeman. But when we anareceiving a good character from those lyse the facts what do Griffin and Cartpersons-these are the two men-the ledge say ? I admit that this meeting of
Siamese youths, upon whose oaths delegates was projected two months bethis charge is attempted to be supported. fore; I admit that the delegates were
What did we get out of them ? Finding elected two months before, and that it was
the country in the state it was, according to be held for the purpose of re-organisto their evidence, who should be here to ing the chartist constitution. We have a
prove the case ? Should it be left to the right to our constitution,if legal; I would
policemen, to the garbled reports of men not support it if illegal. We also met to
who went out as spies-men who were heal our differences. Here, in the first
sent out to prove everything connected instance, you are asked to believe this,especially with the Chartists, or should that men, known to differ, meet to conit be proved by the gentlemen who had spire; that men ktilown to have dissenan interest in the preservation of the sions among themselves meet to combine.
peace of the country ? Where is the Gentlemen, we did combine. " When
mayor of Manchester? Where is the bad men conspire, good men must comWhere bine." We combined; but, as has been
bonrouighreeve of Salford X
are the authorities ? Where are the well observed by a high authority, "Ne-

288
ver did good men meet for a good purpose without being thoroughly acquainted
with each other; and never yet was there
an instance known of bad men uniting
and co-operating for a bad purpose without being thoroughly known to, and having entire confidence in, each other."-That the Attorney-General won't deny.
Then you have here, combining together
in the character of conspirators, men
known to be at variance with each other;
you have a reporter dismissed from my
service, and with a pique against me, reporting not for me, but for other papers,
preserved in the meeting at my request.
After the character of some of the evidence; after the fact of the notes of
the policemen being preferred to their
own recollection, the notes of one being
taken in a fair legible ruuning band,
while his elbow was jogged by the crowd,
-I did hope that the same character
would have been preserved throughout
the examination. I did think that if the
notes of a policeman were better than
recollection, the notes of a reporter, taken
before he consented to become a witness,
and therefore independent of bias and
divested of that charge now brought
against him, might have purged off much
of the accusation now brought against us.
What was he examined upon ? His
recollection. What did he say ? That
he had full notes. He never was asked
for the notes. In his depositions they
were; here they are not. If the best
evidence that the case would admit of
was to be produced, why were not the
notes read ? If there was aught proving
anything against the conspirators, it
would be in the notes. It was said that
their speeches were to be suppressed.
They could not be suppressed from the
notes; therefore, you must inferthat there
was nothing in the notes of Griffin which
would tell against the conspirators. I
have shown, that men must have confidence in each other before they can
conspire: why, there was a youth
amongst us, one of a deputation, to
whom we refused admission as a deI said, " No, they shan't
putation.
come in as a deputation, because that
would be illegal ;" but we got it out of
Cartledge that they might come in as a
portion of the audience. You heard from
Griffin that he had two copies of the ad-

dress; that he sent one to the Statesman;
and, if there were anything against us,
why did he not send a report to the
Statesman ? Because it would not serve
his purpose. But first, as to the Attorney-General. He confesses that I opposed the strike. Then you have only to
deal with me from the 13th to the 17th
of August. The Attorney-General, so
far as I am concerned, has limited the
inquiry to that period. Now, you are
perfectly aware of the manner in which
a charge of conspiracy can be got up. It
will be my duty, gentlemen, to take off
all the magic with which legal ingenuity
has surrounded this charge of conspiracy.
Gentlemen, you have heard of awful
practices; of mysterious doings; of the
manner in which I travelled;-so much
so, that I thought I was one of an audience listening to, and partaking of, some
I looked
melo-dramatic performance.
for the properties, I looked for the scenery,
I looked for the masks, I looked for the
daggers, I looked for the blue fire-for the
torches- for the bayonets-for the swords
and pistols, by which this conspiracy to
upset the government by tumults was to
be carried out. Gentlemen, I went at
night from London, by the railway train,
-with 300 other people,-as, I believe,
did Sir James Graham, when he came
hither the other night. I then went in a
cab by myself-because nobody else was
going my way-to Mr. Scholefield's. I
went there at half-past five in the morning,-because that was the time the train
arrived in Manchester. I left my own
house in my own carriage, and proceeded
to theVictoria, Euston Square, and there I
waited till the train was ready to start.
Gentlemen, I went in the Coupe with an
officer of the Guards,-conspiring, of
course,-and there we went, in the darkness and secrecy of night, rolling alon
under the dark tunnels; there I hear
the rumbling of the wheels, and the echo
of the conspirators' voices, dinning in my
ears (Laughter.) Then I arrived at
the scene where the conspiracy was first
to be hatched; I arrived early in the
morning; I slept till three in the afternoon; I am never seen or heard of again
till three o'clock in the noon-tide sun of
an August day; then I so conceal myself
in a cab that all see me, and flock around
me. They know me from the very ap-

289
pearance of the cab; it smells of brimstone; there is conspiracy in its look;
its very wheels knock fire out of the
stones ; it smells of nothing but Peterloo!
Hunt's monument! strike for wages! tumultuous meetings! riots! turn out the
hands! and carry the Charter by tumult
and violence! (Laughter). [This portion of Mr. O'Connor's address was delivered in a subdued but perfectly audible
tone of voice, analagous to what is usually
termed, " a playhouse whisper," and well
adapted for exhibiting the ludicrous character of the charge of conspiracy. The
laughter produced in court was by no
means inconsiderable.] I passed down
to the Sherwood Inn; because I was sent
for. For what? To ascertain whether
I would go to the tea-party that night. I
go to the Sherwood Inn (Tib-street) in
the most public part of Manchester; a
crowd gathers round : I request them to
disperse; and I say, " Look out for a
place where we can meet without being
interrupted." I refuse to go to Carpenters'
Hall for fear of the crowd. I see the
effect of my first appearance in Manchester; I leave the place; I abandon
my intention; I go to Mr. Scholefield's,
because he is an old friend of eight
years' standing. Why ? Because I
learned that the procession was put off;
and I went there to join in putting off the
meeting in his chapel also. Then I
learned that he had completed the good
work before me. I found that he had
come from the printer's with the
bill. Gentlemen, I am now stripping
this conspiracy of all its technicalities,
and you will see which comports most
with the truth, my case or the case
of the Attorney-General. Mr. Scholefield came in. and showed me the bill. I
clasped his hand, and said, "Thank
God; but if I had known this, I need
not have come at all." But, gentlemen,
being there, was I, having been elected
two months before for a specific purpose,
-was I even then to refuse to throw my
weight, such as it was, into the scale, and
to endeavour, by the best means in my
power, to aid in turning this, which was
likely to be a disastrous strike,intoa peacefiul agitation even for the Charter ?-But
to return, gentlemen; I left in a cab, at
three o'clock in the morning; I return at
half past three o'clock to Mr, Scholefield's,

andlIam seen no moretill the 17th. On the
17th we met. Circumstances had arisen,
which, from our political position, made
it desirable. Recollect you are not to
find us guilty for that. Let me now caution you, gentlemen, if you think me
guilty of too much popularity, find your
verdict so. Say "O'Connor has too
much popularity," if you think we ought
not to have interfered, say so. But then,
say that no other pafty in the state had a
right to interfere in politics. Let the prohibition be general. We met; the con.
spirators met; in the midst of tumult, we
met at eleven; we separated at half-past
five, and had an hour and a half for dinner; so that we were four hours sitting
in conclave, conspiring against the peace
of the country. We passed a resolution;
we passed an address. Now take that
resolution. What did we get from Cartledge ? That it was the character of every
resolution that was passed relative to the
Charter, and especially the words, "That
we wish to continue the struggle, until
the Charter becomes the law of the land."
"Struggle," says the Attorney-General,
" what does that mean ?" Why, what does
an election struggle mean ? What does any
struggleggle
struggle mean ? What does a
in
the house of commons mean ? )oes it
mean that the parties catch each other
by the throats and strangle each other ?
No; it means that they are to " contest,
contend, and stand together." This resolution-this all important resolution,
this awful, this damning resolution, this
dark-lantern resolution, what did it refer
to ? That we were to have the Charter
then ? No such thing; but that we were to
continue, not the strike, but the struggle,
till the Charter became the law of the
land. " Then," says the Attorney-General, " this is a tumult, a riot; this is
not legal means. I admit (says the Attorney-General) that you have a right
to contend by peaceful means, but not
by tumultuous meetings." Now, gentlemen, there is no one in this Court more
anxious and willing to receive a proper
definition of the law, on all matters connected with agitation, and with public
meetings, and political movements of
every description, than I am myself.
Nor, gentlemen, do I consider that I
can produce to you a higher authority
than the Attorney-General himself as to

290
want does constitute a tumultuous meeting. I don't ask you to take the law
from me, gentlemen; I have attended
more public meetings than any man
living, or that ever lived before me, and
I was never charged with causing a single breach of the peace: I have often
stopped it. But hear what the AttorneyGeneral considers a tumultuous meeting.
In addressing the Court at Newport,
upon an important transaction, this was
his opinion as to what constitutes a tumultuous

meeting:-" Gentlemen,

the

law cannot be altered by the conduct of
those who are called upon to obey it;
and I make that admission to my Lords
upon the bench, because, in the few remarks that I am about to make upon
this part of the case, I do not mean to
say that any change of the law has occurred by reason of the relaxed discipline
of society that has prevailed for some
time past. But I do mean to say this
distinctly, that from what has actually
taken place, from that which has been
permitted, perhaps, gentlemen, in some
instances even sanctioned, a very different estimation is to be held of public
meetings, ay, gentlemen, and even of
armed meetings, from that which might
have been formed some twenty or thirty
years ago, and that the object and the
intention of the parties may justly receive, at the close of the year 1839, a construction far more favourable than, perhaps, could fairly have been conceded
in earlier periods of the history of this
country, that you and I are familiar with:
for I do notgo back to very remote periods."
Then the Attorney-General, in order to
be explicit in laying down the law for
us; well knowing that those proceedings
would be spread throughout the length
and breadth of the land; well knowing
that they would establish the character
of public meetings, goes through the
detail of that large public meeting, held
in London, of the trades, of 200,000
persons, and he shows that not one of
them were punished, and then he concludes," Gentlemen, under the name of
agitation, what has not been done almost
in every town and in every corner of this
kipg4om? And if we pass-and, gentlemen, I shall do this lightly, because I
do it reluctantly-if we pass for one
moment, and take a glance at the sister

kingdom, there familiarly we talk of a
petition from 500,000 fighting men.
Gentlemen, I say no more upon this
point, but I call upon you to remember
these transactions when you come to deliver your verdict on the guilt or the
innocence of the prisoner. And, let it
be understood, that so far as permission,
if not actual encouragement, has been
afforded to such proceedings, that it would
be most unjust to use the same measure
that was formerly in use as to the
motives of parties. It would not be
justice to weigh in the same scales as
were formerly used, the transactions about
which you are making inquiry to-day."
Gentlemen, we have only to come from
1839 to 1843, and give us an extension
of the rule the Attorney-General has
made, and, by the rule of three, give us
the benefit of one-third greater relaxation upon his construction of the way
in which the character of public meetings ought to be estimated. The Attorney-General told the jury, at Monmouth, that the Reform Bill has altered
the character of those meetings; that
armed men had passed unpunished;
that they had heard of petitions from
500,000 fighting men in the sister kingdom, and that the Penal Code had been
relaxed; but the political code had been
cotemporaneously made more stringent.
But what says the Attorney-General
now ? That we have been guilty of
attempting to upset the constitution,
and to produce a change in the laws
of this country, by tumultuous meetings.
Then I give you the character of what
those tumultuous meetings are. But let
us see whether or no this comes late,
and with a bad grace; and if there is
(independently of what we learn from
the acquittal of Wilde, and the reason
assigned for it) anything more lurking
at the bottom of this trial. You receive
evidence here; but there are other
sources from which you receive evidence. You take the laws from the
legislature, as passed by Lords and Commons, and assented to by the Monarch.
Are you not bound, then, on a national
transaction of this kind, where men in
the Upper House, of rank and property,
men in the Lower House of all descriptions of wealth and property,-are you
not bound to take the uncontradicted

291

opinions of such high authority as he
Let us see what
Lords and Commons
they are. I give you the name of the
highest, best, and greatest men in this, or
any other country. I give you the name
of the most finished man, take him for
all in all, that England can now produce.
I much differ from him in politics;
but I think there is not, in this country,
such another man, with such a mechanical head, such comprehension, such a
power of mind, as Lord Brougham;
and what does he say ? The AttorneyGeneral has sought to drive me out of
my course: he will tell you that the
acts of another party are not acts that
we can justify ourselves upon. Lord
Brougham says, "Trials are about to
take place; but I hope the parties I have
charged will be called upon to answer on
those trials." They have sought to make
Lord Brougham a madman. Would to
God I were such a madman ! Was that
the speech of a madman ? No : it was
given upon his knowledge of the doctrine
of the law of presumption Then let us
see whether the House of Lords and the
House of Commons agree upon one thing.
It is an extraordinary fact; but so it is,
and you are cognizant of it.-[The Attorney-General was quitting the court
temporarily.] BeforetheAttorney-General goes, speaking of the press, I have his
authority, in the most unqualified manner, for saying that the statement imputed
to him in the papers, that he said in the
was
House of Commons that hlie coming
down here to prosecute " the leading and
most important offender," is not correct.
The Attorney-General assures me that
he never used one word of it. Gentlemen, this will make you cautious about
receiving the reports of policemen. All
the papers, although reported by different
reporters,-the Herald, the Times, the
Morning Chronicle, and the lorning
.Idvertiser,-all reported it in the same
The Attorney-General never
words.
spoke them, and he has authorized me
to contradict them. The Attorney-General is there miitepresented; and I believe
it, for this remon, because reporters upon
some papers very often exchange their
may happen that part of the
slips, and it
same speech may be reported for the
four papers by one and the same individual. Lord Stanhope congratulated his

countrymen upon the little damage that
had been done to property, and none to
lilbe. Lord Brougham, together withothers,
charges the league with being the cause of
the disturbance; Mr. Walter charges the
poor-law as being the cause of the disturbances; the league and Mr. Cobden
charge the landlords as being the cause
of the disturbance; Lord Francis Egerton charges the Anti-corn-law League
with originating the disturbance, and
others have charged it upon the conservatives of Lancashire. Here is an extraordinary thing; six parties in the field;
lords and commoners charge five different sources with being the cause of these
disturbances; but no one, except t!e Attorney-General, charges the Chartists.
Until this trial took place; you heard of
no charge against the Chartists. You
have heard from those parties that they
severally charged one another, but no one
but the Attorney-General charges the
Chartists. Ah! but there is something
still more extraordinary in this most extraordinary case. The gentleman who
got up this case for the prosecution, reminds me of a fine old hunter, which
required a saddle wide in the gullet, full
in the seat and comfortable to ride on.
The horse died; but the saddle was so
good that the hunting gentleman went
down into the market with the saddle to
find another horse that it would fit. So
it was with the gentleman who got up the
case for the prosecution. He went down
into the manufacturing districts, with his
saddle to find who it would fit! He tried
it upon the League; but finding that the
Chartists had the broadest shoulders,
and that it fitted them best, he placed
the saddle upon their backs and girthed it fast upon them.- (laughter.)A case was gone into before the magistrates before the learned gentleman undertook to get utip the case for the Crown.
Upon that case the magistrates themselves,
who were most interested in preserving
the peace, got evidence; and they brought
that evidence to substantiate their case
before themselves. The gentleman who
came afterwards, went to the mniagistrates, to the parties who got up the first
case, and proposed his sliding scale: he
allowed those witnesses who gave evidence
before the magistrates to slide off, and got
an entirely new batch of witnesses, save

292
and except the Siamese youths. That
was the character of the conspiracy, and
now we come to the resolution. That
resolution speaks of a struggle. Terrible
word. What a struggle the tories had
with the whigs during the last ten years!
What a violent struggle they shall have
in the next ten years, if I can accomplish
it, until they do justice to the people;
that is, according to my notion of justice;
not by violence. I am not a conspirator:
I never have been; and what is extraordinary, after all the pillaging, ransacking
and searching without search warrants,
after all the breaking into houses,--I
being the great conspirator,-not a line is
found in any man's house affecting me.
Where was the red box then-where was
then the red box of patches picked up
here and there, and which box I would
recommend the Crown to send to the
Chinese Exhibition. Not a single letter
is found, notwithstanding all their researches, against me. Why ? Because I
never was a conspirator, and never wrote
a private political letter to any man in
ny life. But what does this resolution
do ? It approves of those who were
turning out of work remaining out, till
they got the wages they turned out for.
Then we come to the address. The
Attorney-General says it recommends
the Executive Address. What if it does?
There is nothing in that. Lord Chatham
approved of the defection of America, and
of the American declaration of independance: a great many men, high in authority, approved of America separating
herself from England. Was that conspiracy ? But we are said to be accessories after the fact in the riots. I should
wish to have some better definition of
the law. I don't understand what an
accessory after a riot means. Does the
Attorney-General mean to say it is an
overt act of conspiracy ? Does the Attorney-General mean- to say, that, if a
man goes to a riot or a fight, and two
days afterwards returns and tells his associates that he saw two parties engaged in
a riot, does that make him an accessory ?
I don't understand the law, gentlemen,
if approving of that which I have a right
to approve of makes me a conspirator.
I now come to an important fact. The
trades' resolutions are spoken of; the
trades' papers are seized; the trades'

address was passed in the face of the
magistrates; we referred to them; we
aid we rejoiced that the trades, after so
long a struggle against us, had come out
for the Charter. But recognition is no
proof of conspiracy; his Lordship will
tell you that; and also, that every man
in that conspiracy must have consented
and joined in one common design to the
same extent as the others. I believe the
Attorney-General will not deny, that
every man in that conspiracy must have
consented to the same extent. Then
as to those addresses and resolutions,
I examined Cartledge at some length;
Griffin not at such a length; and why ?
Because he had not sworn to one word
contained in his depositions; because the
Attorney-General was afraid of testing
Griffin's memory too much, apprehensive
that he would not stand cross-examination; and, to my astonishment, and the
astonishment of the Court, the man who
appeared before the magistrates to support the weight of the case, was let down
of a sudden, without proving anything at
all, except what made for us. What was
the evidence of these two men as to the
character of the meeting ? The Attorney-General cannot get over it. If they
take their evidence against me, they must
also take it for me. What did Cartledge
say ? That he had attended hundreds of
meetings, and had never heard me say
one word at variance with the duty of a
good subject. I asked Griffin, and he
said the same. I ask you, could Griffin's
notes tell against me when Griffin's tongue
told you (knowing these notes), that there
was nothing against me ? Then I am
seen with Dr. M'Douall and Leach, a
very natural consequence of our both
being delegates. Leach was no delegate
at all. He merely formed one of the
audience. Railton also was there. He is
here as a defendant, but he was not present
at the conference as a delegate. He was
admitted as a stranger, and had nothing
whatever to do with what was going on.
I now come to speak of the Executive
Address, which the delegates described
as " a bold and manly address." In the
year 1843 am I to be convicted because
of that? Is that an offence, either at
common law or by statute ? Am I to
be convicted for saying that that is "a
bold and manly address." If I wished

293
to go further, might I not have adopted
that address ? But I did not; nor am I
in any way connected with it; for it is
proved to be in the hands of the printer
till ten o'clock; I am not in Manchester
at half-past five that morning, and not
out of my bed till three o'clock in the
afternoon. Having laid before you, gen.
tlemen, the manner in which the conference was brought together, just let me
see what we did at that conference, independently of what is given in evidence.
flow are you to learn that ? From conjecture, and conjecture only. But, having
failed to get the whole truth out of Griffin,
J-am obliged to do what the crown ought
to do, to make patchwork of their evidence, and show that they have not a leg
to stand on. They put me with rioters to
make me guilty of riot; with men who
have attended illegal meetings that I never
saw, to make me guilty of that offence;
they put me with men of all descriptions,
as they call them, in order to prove me
guilty of all sorts of offences. But I am
not proved to be a party to any riot,
tumult, or conspiracy, or of attending
illegal meetings. You will ask what
were the address and the resolutions of
the trades' delegates, those resolutions
will be sent to you, and you put your
own construction on them. 250 or 350
in number were disturbed in their sittings,
and their papers were taken, and the
address which they had adopted. You
will ask what that address and those resolutions were. You will ask why (the
magistrates being in possession of their
address and resolutions) they are not now
before the court ? Those are questions
you cannot get over, but must ask yourselves. Every witness on the first four
days proved this important, this vital
fact; though the Attorney-General, or
rather, gentlemen, I woild say, the prosecution, did not see the drift of my quesEvery witness, on being questions.
tioned as to the time when the violence
ceased, and peace was restored, swore
that it was about the 20th of August,
about the 20th-mind that, gentlemen!
My character is established to the 13th.
I am not an ordinary man. I am only
obliged to prove character every Saturday night; and the same article in the
.Northern Star of the 13th, which won
the good opinion of the Attorpey-Gene-

ral for its powerful recommendation to
peace, was again printed in the Star of
the 20th; and that was the paper which
announced the meeting of the conference;
and from that day peace was restored;
the conspirators had done their work.
That will be proof of something which the
Attorney-General cannot get over. What
is conspiracy ? It implies secrecy. What,
then, is the charge ? Secrecy. What is
the proof ? Publication.- (Laughter.)
That is not the charge of an ordinary
conspiracy. I they had done that, they
might have put 2,000 or 3,000 in the indictment if they liked; but they charge
us with a conspiracy wherein our transactions were to be kept private, because
they would not depend on Griffin, who
was discharged for giving wrong reports
of the Chartist meetings. And then they
rely on this address; which does what ?
Recognises the address of another body.
Gentlemen, suppose a man commits a
very bad act; no matter how bad, and
suppose I direct attention to it as bold
and manly. Suppose one man meets
three men on the highway, and blows
their brains out, am I accessory to the murder if I say that it was a bold and manly
act. Would you say I was a conspirator ? Apart from these technicalities, take
all and not a part of the evidence into
your jury box; take no part of the evidence by itself, but take the whole together and see the effect they produce, and
that they were intended to produce; note
that every speaker afterwards recommended a return to labour. Gentlemen, you.
cannot hold 're up as a conspirator; I
deserve the character of
know thai,
being a peace maker, I know that you
will notrefuse me credit for it Gentlemen
of the jury, we have that evidence so full,
conclusive, plump, and genuine, that even
the prosecution for the last day could not
contradict it. The Crown, seeing what
I was driving at, said, " This won't do;
we must begin to look at the date onr
which the disturbance terminated-we
must endeavour to prove that the outbreak
continued for a considerable time after
the publication of the executive placard,,
and the article which appeared in the
Northern Star." The Attorney-General
had borne testimony to my character up to
thel3thofAugust. "Oh!" said they,"the
disturbances lasted five weeks after that.'
U

29.4.
Theytook a respite, they bad Sundayor watch for FeargusO'Connor, and knowmeetn
d
ing that there was to b", a se
breathing timie, nd th
i an1nowing, also,' thatFats
dg
why this question was, poftbtoeveryWitness.
Here is the'Star of'ite 20th,-and'there O'Connor-was at that meeting -have
is proof that all- crime was easing at we any proof that this policeman reiThat won't do," said ported to the magistrates where they
that period.
"wc~e ustcaryon
thpy the, must cdr o this conspiracy might find this grand conspirator, who
"ve
a little further."'Then'they got a new was conspiring for the destruction of all
itnesses, they procured-'fifteen the property in the country. Talking of
batch of wfresh witnesses, somie-of whomwerecon.- the destruction of property, what say the
fined in Lancaster Castle. I ask where men of property of all parties P They
and all the others, say that it makes them rejoice more in
was Luke'M-Dermott,
whose names were on the hack of the the name of Englishmen than ever, to
indictment? I have-been'told that think that these people had so much
M'Dermnott was- in the felon's cell. power in teir 'hands, 'andused it so
These are the kind .ofWitnessesthey have. mildly. It'has heen -said in the House
been ferretting out toget-up-this ease of 'Lords, a4nd ini the House of Coinagainst us. Nowwe-come -to ana- mons--t 'has been re-echoed and re.
lyse the evidence.-Let'us hear how peatedthrough the press., that there
n
they opened Ais case for the conspi- couldhave beenno conspiracies at the
i-ld- Ard
ry. 'ildyaid~3 Bell] a. policeman, bottom of this., hecause ,the
orking11
,a'
, piracieti
ofI
classes
swore hie was at Mr. 'Sholefield's at mornin appeared to have so thorough a
nine o'clock on the morning0of thq veneratioi for :property of all descrip16th, and that he went there hecause tions,and for life. Why, many persons,
I was there, and it was to'be a secret actually -statvinig, wenit amongst those
whomthey, saw likely to break the peace,
meeting.
The -JUDGE.:-Is that so,?Ishall And, Checked them. That fact we have
indisputablyproved:.at the commencelook.
mentofthlye evidence ? This-indictment
Mr. O'C ONNO R :-A t
in-your Lordship's recollecion that he runs oVer'with '-a cotinUado;So that
He swore he there is nio power -toI separate things.
-swore he watched me.
"went there, because he6heard that Fearous The defendants have no -power to Justif.
O'Connor was there, and tatthere was TLis indictment was laid, as never was
If we were
toI be a private meeting.-The-trades' indictment laid . before.
nwjeeting was dispersed by the.authori- indicted for extorsively'taking money, or
ties. There were two meetings een- for assault or 'battery, wve might set UP
tlemen, the trades' -delegates, and the an-alibi;"but here we cannot meet the
conference delegaates. Never, allow these charge, we :are so imixed up -together.
two to he mixed up, -the.one" with the But what is the first evidencee of out-'
other.,, On the 16th. the trades' meetinig break'? That Mr. Bayley's mnill stopped.
was, routed and dispersed, And on the, There -was no riot up :to that time;
same 'day this policeman, Was- sent to althoughb the Attorney-Gener-al, goes
back to the -26th July,; for he is not
watch me.
TheI JUDGE :-James' Hindley- satisfied -with including two months in
this all-emnbracing indictment. -On
is that the perso n
Mr. O'CONNOR :-No, my Lord- that day .a -meeting was -held, but
it was adjourned ; but, hbesays, the'
Bell, the policeman.The JUDGE :-It is -of no, conse-' adjourned meetingr never took place.
Then lhe goes to; the 8th,. of August, and
quence..
i
llrvesthaal thseoutbreaks Bayley's
Mr. O'CONNOR:-H1e 'went there,,
he said, because he hleardThat Iwas-to* Anven, whvere the first -that wvere dis.
be. there ; and that _there,-was 'to hbe aq rtisedl from thbeir Work, took the lead and
Now, dfd hereprt* heade the processioiis. The men who took
secret iiieeting.
i
that to the authorities I i5 1ekew' that part i:'s thiere 'not men, that I headed;
the -trades' m-ueeting of degtites was hotA the men who were-told by their, masdi'spersed; but, In this distuLe taeo ters to,,go -Fand play--for -a rmonthi. There'
here the, seat o'f
-ite
'et~,did 1oi,1,6n., sCu-t 'to is the coineet

diJcrd,the entre, and cause of the' conflision,. They are turned out by their
.,masters; they are then ,seen at the head
:of every procession; they forced .out the
others. :Pilling's address you:heard, gentemen.. I -wish I had not heard it; I
wish the Court had not heard it; I wish
there had-not been a necessity for hearing it. His case was the case of thousands and tens of thousands, and those
men who are stricken - unnaturally
stricken-become themselves conspirators,
for the purpose of keeping up the price of
their own labour. Then you have had
all those defendants beforeyou ; you havle
,seen their demeanour; you have heard
their defences. Out of so many speeches
you must have discovered what was ingenuous and what was disingenuous. I extracted a good character for those who
were known to them, from the principal
witnesses. The defendants were not
obliged to me for it. You have learned
from them all what they say are the facts;
and, although not given in the form of
evidence, yet, as discriminating and dispassionate men, put it altogether and see whether or no out of the lump you can educe
the truth. Chief Justice Tindal has spoken
to this case. He has very properly made a
distinction between a mountebank and a
:zealous politician. He has told the couutry, that, if a man conscientiously and zealously expresses his opinions, though he
may pass the prescribed limits of the ]aw,
still his opinions are to be respected. Chief
Justice Tindal did not tell the people that
they were to respect what was illegal, but
that the opinions of a man, however
warmly they might be avowed, if they did
not absolutely go beyond the law, were
to be honoured as the conscientious convictions of the man who uttered them.
Gentlemen, if I were asked, which party
in the country has been the most violent,
I might be disposed to allude to one
whose writings and speeches were prominently before;the public; but, as my
object is not to make out a case for prosecution against any party, shall abstain
from any further reference to such a
topic. I have stood in a more prominent
position than any public man for the last
ten .years in England; and if I were to
ask for a character for zeal, if the forms
of etiquette will admit of it, but they will
not, I might say that I had the honour

of sitting with his Lordship (Mr. Baron
Rolfe) for three years in the House Of
Commons, andith the Attrney-General
for three years in the House of Commons;
and, during that period, I think they will
say Twas as zealous a politician as ever
entered that House. 'I have been out o
the'House of Commons for nearly seven
years, and during that period I have
spent more than 12,0001. of my own
money in advocating this cause. And
here i must rejoice, that I am able to say
this in this court of justice, in the presence of those who know me best, and
know every transaction of my life. That
I have an opportunity of giving a
triumphant refutation of the palry aspersions of those who have insinuated that I
have been induced to pursue this course,
and give an impulse to this cause, from
pecuniary and interested motives; for,
although the Attorney-General, in his
opening speech, said it mildly, yet at the
same time most pointedly, that I had pursued that course because of some interest
or benefit I expected to derive from my
connection with the Northern Star. Gentlemen, I never received a farthing, or the
fraction of a farthing, from any man, for
anything in connection with the Charter;
I never travel at the expense of the
Chartist body; I never deferided myself
at the expense of the Chartistbody; I never
received a fiaction of their money; I have
often paid hundreds of pounds to their
funds; and I am so delicate on this, that
I never attend anywhere as .guest that
I do not insist on paying for miny ticket;
and, to support their objects, I have
sometimes paid as much as 101. for gas
for a meeting, Gentlemen, I shall place
my clerk, and other witnesses, in that
box, to produce my character; and so far
from making money by that extraordinary golden thing-the Northern Star,
I came to it a rich man, and I am now a
poor man. I have spent a fortune in this
cause. I am represented as a political
trafficker. The whole tone of the press
has been to show, that I used the Northern
Star to excite the people, in order to
make it a medium of pecuniary profit to
myself. Gentlemen, I am not content
with that; I have got a witness from
Ireland, and I will give you my charaeter from those who have known me
from a child; and you will discover, that,

290
before ever I had the Northern Star, I
carried into practice that which has
been, and still is, the theory of my
principles. You will find that I have
devoted my whole time and money to
the cause of the poor; not to a mere lip
service; but I have been, for years together, paying as much as £20 a week to
support people made paupers by oppression. And that is the reason I rejoice in
this trial. I think I have shown my zeal.
If I were a person, from pliancy of disposition, capable of being moulded into
a political mountebank, I might have had
£50,000 for my services; but I refused
it as I would now refuse £100,000 if it
would purchase me your acquittal, if you
were not convinced of my innocence. I
use this as an occasion of triumph. I
scorn to be bought and sold. I shall never
sell my principles to any party whatever,
A trafficking politician ! Why such has
been the pecuniary gain which I have
derived from the agitation in which I
have been engaged, that I have sold
landed estates-have sold as much as
£1000 worth of timber-to aid the cause;
I have sold an estate bringing me in
£350 a year paid to the day; I have
conducted thirteen contested elections in
Ireland entirely at my own expense;
never eating a dinner at the expense of
the candidate: in attending elections in
Ireland, as agent, I As entitled to my
fees; but I never received a single farthing.
That was before I had the Northern Star.
You, gentlemen, may think this unimportant, but I will establish my character,
i.hich is of infinitely more importance
lo me than any of the technical forms of
law with which the Attorney-General is
surrounding me. My character, gentlemen, is the more important to me, seeing
the manner in which I have been held
up to public odium by those who, having
no principle of their own, are ever ready
to impute dishonesty to others. I tell
you it is not from poor men that I collect
funds; I do not take the pence out of
the pockets of those who have but little
for themselves; I did not take a farthing
out of the defence fund in 1839; on the
the contrary they owe me £280; for I
was their treasurer: I kept the account;
I balanced it, and there remains a debt
of £280 due to me. Gentlemen, I advanced a thousand guineas out of my own

pocket when Mr. Frost was tied, before
a single penny was subscribed by the
Chartist body for defraying the expenses
of his defence. I have never allowed a
Chartist to be prosecuted without flying
to the rescue, and thus testing my principles by my example and my practice.
Then you have heard of my popularity.
If this be a crime, find me guilty of
popularity if you please. But with all my
popularity, where is my offence ? Where
is my name mentioned, except by the
cracked-man. One man said he looked to
Bronterre O'Brien, Feargus O'Conner,
and Dr. M'Douall; but that was not evidence. Another man said I was going to
Manchester,and several letterswereproved,
but none of them contained the name of
any one of the grand conspirators. From
the 17th of August, no act of mine is
proved to be connected with the grand
conspiracy-not a single act. The Attorney-General's going to prosecute us,
and his acquittal of Wilde, shows that
we are indicted for advocating the Charter. Now a nice question will arise here
as to whether or no we are to take the law
as to the legality or illegality of our principles from so high an authority as the
Attorney-General.; and the question for
you is, whether the Attorney-General at
Monmouth is to declare those principles
legal, and then to come to Lancaster, and
prosecute us for the same thing. He will
say, " No, I don't; it is for causing tumults." Then I must ask the AttorneyGeneral, whether the tumult charged on
us is as great as the tumult proved on
that occasion at Monmouth and justified
by him. Gentlemen, this is along question; you have heard the case of the
Crown for five long days. Ours won't
take as long; but, under the circumstances of the indictment being against
so many, it would be no wonder if we occupied more of your time. Now, gentlemen, this is high authority, telling us
what the law is; how far the law justifies
us in going; and whether or no the agitating of these principles is legal. Just
hear; and, although the Attorney-General denied it at Monmouth, after
you hear this I think you will say
he is a good Chartist. " Gentlemen,"
(he said, speaking of Mr. Frost), " he
becama a Chartist, and, in common
with many others, he adopted the opinions

that are supposed to belong to that body
of men. Gentlemen, I hardly know
what is meant by a Chartist." [He does
now, Gentlemen.] One of the witnesses
on the present occasion, spoke of five
articles; but what the five articles were
did not transpire. But the little that one
picks up from the intimations of the
newspapers on the subject, would induce
wne to suppose that they carried their
views of Reform far beyond the Reform
Bill introduced by Lord Grey's administration, and that they ardently desire to establish Universal Suffrage, Vote by Ballot,
Annual Parliaments, no Property qualification, and, according to some statements,
that they look forward to a better distribution of property. Gentlemen, with
respect to the first four of these matters, I,
for one, do not agree in any respect with
the Chartists; but, I believe upon these
subjects their opinions are entertained
by many Members of Parliament of
undoubted respectability and honour, and
considerable talent. If what I have heard
upon the subject be true, many names
have been subscribed, to a document, the
avowed object of which is to frame what
is called the charter of the people, by
expounding the principles on which it is
to rest. Gentlemen, I have abstained, I
hope, from naming any person uncon.nected with this case. I mean to adhere
rigidly to this, and to give no offence
to any absent person, and not to use
.the privilege that I have-I ought also,
perhaps, to say the duty I have, of addressing you, so as not to create any feeling
of pain in any quarter whatever; and I
am sure that I best fulfil my duty to Mr.
Frost, and most to his entire satisfaction,
if I refrain from making any remarks
upon any one that can create a moment's
pain, in respect of any past conduct or
transaction. These Chartists, however,
it must be admitted, stand at present precisely in the relation to the present constitution as established in the year 1832,
in which the advocates for rebform stood
in relation to the old constitution that
was remodelled by the Reform Bill; and
however differing from those who are
called Chartists in opinion, I must do
them the justice to say, that Chartism so
far is not treason, nor the public assertion
of it rebellion; and I must go further
and say, that, although I trust never to

live to see the day, and I trust no one in
whom I take an interest will ever live to
see that day, (fatal as I think it would be
to the happiness, the prosperity, and the
well-being of this country) when those
principles shall be established; yet I
must say, that if at any time it should become the confirmed opinion of the large
mass of intelligence and of numbers-of
the strength and sinews of the community-if the intelligence that cotrouls
that strength should finally determine to
adopt the Chartist code, doubtless adopted
it will be, as the Reform Bill was, and
mere wealth would struggle - [Struggle ! struggle! struggle! gentlemen]against it, in my opinion, in vain.
Now, gentlemen, what have I shown you
here ? Here you have at least a recognition of the right to struggle for the
Charter. Then you have, at all events,
what constitutes a tumultuous meeting,
and afterwards you have the fact of this
prosecution of Chartists, for advocating
that struggle, even in milder terms than
those prescribed by the Attorney-General.
Gentlemen, though not confessedly, yet
impliedly, you will find, that, when organic changes take place in the constitution, a relaxation of the law is allowed.
You have a relaxation of the law urged
by the Attorney-General in 1839, in consequence of an organic change which had
previously taken place; so that, although
the Reform Bill left many without the
pale of the constitution, yet impliedly, as
shown by the Attorney-General, it guaranteed an increase of political power to
those men. Although not yet included
in the franchise, they went on paripassu,
those without with those within; those
within enjoying the benefits of the organic
change; those without thinking there
ought to be a larger extension in the
outward details of the machinery by
which the thing is to be carried on.
Hence it is from the opinion given during
the agitation of the Reform Bill, from the
confirmation of the manner in which that
bill was forced upon a reluctant government, that now the Attorney-General
places us in ihe same position in 1839
and 1843, that the Whigs and Reformers
were placed in, in 1831 and 1832. I am
contented it should be so: I will stand
the contrast. A conspirator, to destroy anything by force or tumult, must

298
. I never.. inflicted an followed ai
upon any dumb custody and:sog
or a; ud
ijry
animal since I was born, and 1 trust in' t the -poorlittlefellow*-ate part of, his.bandand
I
God never ill Iow Nas!.tbhe Reformn hisartm off."
Beill ctrried?
Woat
is not a part of. the; libel, but the
Where arie our dead-? -Where are our w1hole of it. For.that Chief Justie
smouldering cities ? Where are our gib- Tindl ti
bets; where ourtansported felons, andthetime.-Anotherlib
was on mytrial.;I wrote immcWhere our gaols ?- las our gaols areIday
full now; but not for the same crimes. diately to take it.out, and proved;that
Take the story of those. mlen around mie, oct of 43,000 copiesit, only appeared in
honest, unsophisticated, struggling most the fist
righteously for their rights, yet respecting special jury, arid found guilty. I received
the property of those who they thought nine months' imprisonment for just taking
had, injured them -even of those who four lines from another paper. Now,
were their unnatural leaders in 1832. although I had no more to do with the
Take them ; analyse them ; lookatbtem ;-authorship of that paragraph than any
oftheury, although the paper in
like conspiratorse
do e lo
them in the situmtion in whlich the Attor- which it first originated 'Was WcEli known
ney-General placed the refo-mers. Do and although-I provedthat the paragraph
was taken out of a part of the firstimH
you see flames
fire-a Nottingham. in flames-a NewN- pression,'Still.I was found guilty. Why
castle consumed ? Do you:see an effigy Because they wanted a Chartist. 'hey
of the king. with his 'head cut offand could nlot charge me with any act of my
inscribed." Reform, or the ling's head," own. Being a public writer in every
and a bloody executioner with a weapon newspaper, and a public speaker in every
Where was all this ? locality, and they being unable to charge
in his: hand.?
y
No; you only find such miottoes as, me w-ith
"More pigs and less pasos."-(Laugh- broughit an ex officio information against
'here is another party,, gentlemeii, me, put me to immense expense, and
ter.)
which has for one of its mottoes, '"They, found me guilty, and'then they prosecuted
that he slain with the sword, are better me for a matter which. vas published and
thian they that be slain with hunger, for icontradicted the very day the paper apthese pine aay, stricken through for peaied. I put in the affidavit of 4,800
want of the fruits of:the field"-rIhen take working menincluding some of-the
us, what has been our conduct for seven officials of Rohdale,, to state that my
years, ? I have been out of the House of' speeches., ill their opiiiion, had preserved
Commons seven years. Ihave been in the peace of the country. Notwithstanid-,
every toWn of England, Ireland and Scot- ing that, I got sixteen monlthsin a-felon's
land, always at My Own expense; Icell, in solitary confinlement, in York
have spoken to millions upon millions of Castle; that was my punishment for that,
en
mn. ; and. I have never been prosecuted gentle'men. Then, as I say, inl this anid
for a word, I have spoken. No. I have other ways great prejudice was excited,
been well watched'. The Argus-eye of, agOainst me. Perhaps y ou- have not heard'
the law has never slept wvhiloe I was- at, many Irish anecdotes. I'll tel you one.
wVork. Mlr. Fox Maule admitted in- the Onice upon a time there was an old' maiden
House of Commons that hieh-ad sent:a. lady, who had. an, old cat and'an old house.special- spy to wvatch me in Scotland. keeper. When the housekeepergrew someI what antiquated' she began to-be nieglirent~
I was much honoured, gentlem-en.
have been prtosecuted- three times before, and. all the crockery began to go. INow the
gentlemen. For wh at? 1I wast once old ladywas very fond- of her crockery-: she
s-Ubjeceted to a trial b.y speci'al juryV for, could stand 'all but this, and s-he began to,
having. taken fouri- les trm anotheri enquire for..the variotis articesthat were
a colun-. Thiey I broken-one of these was an-old Chfina
p aper, to meup)
1
which. was'.a great favorite,:werethee
:bowl,
"A Poor little fellow brokRe out of Wanrininter '"ccMolly , where is: the china- howl .P"
ivorkbousc on Siaurday last. The overseeris," Airab, inusha! God' knowvs.. ma'am,.

bb'a&-, cruel; n

2019
t
p
aain .- heGhartist
e'the. chitna hb.ItocreateF pe
bt-t fthe- red:, eatt
A few-days-.afterward-S
the chinanteapt bdy?
a
ei
s
be"got-UP,
was missing; and thelady asked) "-Molly, they can-get a:mntofire:at-his own
what has become ofr the china tea-pot?" hat at Southumpton, andthen.declare-it
eu
"Musha, God knows, ma'am, but sure a Chartito
the red cat broke the- china- tea-pot." So, the- public mind is to be diverted, while
the red; cat broke almost everything. At. experiments of great changes in financial
last the red cat was turned.away; but then, and- commercial affairs areein
wen anything was missing, the red cat then some thing.is got up, in hich the
had always been there. At last the red Chartists-always-figure; and we.read
cat was doomed to death; it was killed,.of a manridig on horseback from
Notwithstanding this, the china. salad - Kent, carrying letters to the post-office,
bowl was lroken. Thatwas: an heir- and all of these developing a conspiracy
loom in the family, and the lady was 'to destroythe QUeen's-life.*My answer
quite affected at its loss. "MHolly," says to thatwas, that the -gentleman on.horsethe lady, " who broke the salad bowl ? " hack was nota: Chartist, for Chartists
Arrah, musha, my lady, sure the red werealways.obliged-to.walk. But what
cat has been here again.." "Why, Molly, do we histhe
aws in
t
how can that be; the red cat was killed." inculcate respectf
cAh, I declare to God, ma'am, I always minds of thepeople. It is by calm disheard that cats had nine lives; but nov passionate trials of this kind that
Now, the people of-this country.will.learn
I'm- sure of it."-(Laughter.)
gentlemen, I think that you, will find to value the law. Teach them to rethat I am the red cat- in this Chartist spect it, and.keepwithin its 1'vi'ind
the
e'h
movement. A riot tdok place at, New-_ but so define
I;
port, in, 1839; 1 was: the red cat -J knew simplest manwill comprehendthem,
all about it. I went down,,and for eight and know whei he is outside the pale
days attended the trial with the Attorney- of the law. Letthose lawsleanto
General here; my name was, never men- mecy, wiha, stern e.ecutive, exacting,
tioned, for th e best reason--that I never implicit
heard of' it till the:accounts appeared in rity, and then-you will find no charges
A petition was pre- for con spiracies, oranythiug of this
the newspapers.
sented to- the House of -Commons; aid&a -kind. Now, in' te negative- as well as
little gentleman there, jealous of my the ffrnaveinactofomIsna
popularity, and- who cannot acquire, well as-of.commission, are sometimes
craklingand:angry
d
-any himself, said that I was the authorfour!
-of it. Gentlemen, I never wrote a-line ifeelings. In the, midst of:their sufferof it,' or saw it- in MS. I saw _I ings all haveb oy--ne honourable testifirst, after its publication, in Y'ork Castle' : mony to.,the, heroic fortitude. and' the
Then comes this address., which, the, exemplary patience: with which they
Times represented to. be little short of !had' borne. their privations., Having,
high treason. I was made- to* be the, heard* of -their. progressive statle from
author of that address all over the bad to wvorse. from the lips of Pilling,
country. Gentlemen, I never saw 1that, his son;wrrwa death-bed,, While his8
address till I saw- it in- print, placarded, wagtes .were1being redticed ; and considerthe
on the walls of Manchester.. Sothatting that-ehis case :-is_ case of thousands,
here we have, Newport, the. national let us see., whether or no they. have a right
petition, and the address; I was the red. to have something of. anger: and- irritation
cat in them all. Gentlemen, I put my' in their minds.. Since the first, of these
name to, my- own acts. I stand, by mny prosecutions,,, there- have been-a. royal.
own acts; I never flinched from the marriage, two royal births and a jubileeresponsibility attached to my own.- acts:.'for the termination of two: sanguinary
A great deal has been said' by-,those 'wars;--thbrn have ,heen congratulations on
behind me-, as to- their indifference,. to the termination, of a peaceful winter,
your verdict. What has- made. them which-, it. had- been rforetold, would be one
of riot and.-blooadshed. We, have had the
ChartQts? In cnsquenPne .of-4what

300
whence cheats were set, at liberty, to make
he nation's jubilee more joyous; but not
a :single political offender was liberated to
:mark the clemency of the crown, though
some of them had been confined for
three years; while thieves, pickpockets,
rascals, and vagabonds of every kind had
been considered fit objects of that clemency; no, it would seem as it the royal
prerogative was exercised merely to fix
the law upon political offenders more
strongly, and to make their case the
harder. Is not that sufficient, goingonfrom
year to year, instead ofusing the graduating
sliding scale of the Attorney-General,
they go from a more liberal construction
of what the right of the people is, to a
.more confined construction of what the
law is. Is that the way by which you
would enforce your acts of parliament?
If you wish to make the people good subjects, and respect the law, let them go to
prison for acts for which the finger of
scorn would point at them after their literauon

" If youi convict us here, the

country at large would see no evidence of
crime, or proof to support the charges
made against us-it will convey no idea
of moral offence, and the public mind, instead of approving the verdict, would be
busily employed in calculating the hours
that must pass, till the time should come
when we may again be received with open
arms by those from whom we are snatched. I am not the man to recommend
any-even the slightest-infraction of the
laws, but I say the only way to secure the
veneration of the people for the laws is to
ensure justice to all. Write your laws
upon the minds and hearts of the people;
enforce them, not by coercion, but by
love, affection, and mercy. See the different manner in which the law can be
strained. Where the law requires it, the
law can make madmen of assassins; it
can make Solons of fools. But, I thank
my God that there is that tribunal. And
let me say now, having practised for a
long time at my own profession, that never in the course of my practice did I
see an investigation more pre-eminently
calculated to inspire all who have witnessed it, not only with respect, bit with veneration for the laws. There have been
trials which carried on their face a
determinalion for persecution. Now,
let us briefly analyze the evidence in

this case, and see how the :severa
charges have been substantiated, and
by what description of evidence they have
been supported. Gentlemen of the jury,
the manner in which this complicated
case has been brought before you, does
not puzzle me so much as it would otherwise have done, had it not been
for the arguments of my Lord. .But
now I come to the material part of this
One witness had it in his
question.
power to tell the authorities, that Feargus O'Connor and his friends were holding a secret meeting. Gentlemen, there
was no difficulty in ferretting out our
place of meeting; and if there was anything illegal in our meeting, it was -he
policeman's duty to communicate the
facts within his knowledge to the authorities. Then what do we find ? That
every witness.speaks to one fact, with a
degree of certainty not bearing upon any
other, viz.-as to the time when the disturbances ceased to exist, when the men
began to " dribble back again," (I think
was the expression) to their respective
avocations. I am now going from memory, over the evidence of Little, special
high constable of Hyde, who evinced so
much anxiety to entrap John Leach, one
of the defendants, and make him the
common disturber-the " Red Cat" of

Hyde. Little said, that after Leach left
Hyde, it was perfectly tranquil. That
evidence was for the purpose of shewing
that Leach was the " Red Cat" there.
Then came Iibbert, clerk to the magistrates at Hyde, and he said the disturbances lasted five or six weeks after the
7th of August-bringing them down to
This is most important.
September.
Now, gentlemen, a part of my case was,
that an experiment was to be tried to
turn out those hands,-to see whether
they could be directed to a repeal of the
Corn-laws. Mr. Rhodes, the son-in-law
of Shepley, swears that, on the 10th of
August, 100 to 150 men came and
turned out his hands, 200 in number;
mind, there was no resistance; they
turned out; the gates were opened for
them. Then, the scheme having failed,
Mr. Rhode's and Mr. *Shepley's hands
again returned to work on the 26th, and
not being anxious to turn-out themselves,
on the latter end of the same month, they
beat off 600 men at noon, and 1,000 in

301
the evening. When it was their master's interest to keep them at work, they
could beat off 1,000; when it was his
interest to let them go, 100 turned out
200. It is a most extraordinary fact,
and I leave it for your consideration. It
will be impossible to consider this case
as a whole, unless you carry the whole
of the evidence with you. The crown
has gone as far as men could go, so to
complicate the case, that if I was not hit
here I was to be hit there. In some
way or other I was to be entangled in
the meshes of the law ; having received the
awfui character, not of pacificator-general,
but of conspirator-general, in this country, for many years. I ask you, were you
not prepared to hear such a burden, such
a load, such a catalogue of crime and
criminality pressed and sworn against me
as never before was presented in a court of
justice. From the character given of me
by the press, were you not prepared, on
account of your prejudices, to hear a great
deal, and to believe anything-even the
worst charge that could-be preferred
against me; and were you not astonished
to find there was so little ? Gentlemen
of the jury, no doubt you will have the
law laid down to you as the law ought to
be laid down; but, taking the opinion of
the Attorney-General, that the law as it
stands was established when the justices
were not so free to express an impartial
opinion, and considering that my Lord
will be obliged to give you the law as he
has it-that is as it was given in the
olden time -" durante bene placito,"
which signifies-"you shall be continued
on the bench so long as you do what I
bid you"-when there were no counsel for the prisoner, and when precedents were drawn from the dark ages;
but now the judge is counsel for the defendants, if they are not otherwise defended-if they have the means, they
have all the advantage of counsel to
defend them-sand if ever there was a
time when a precedent is to be drawn
from the living genius of the day-so as
to represent the existing mind of the
country,-if we have lived long enough
under the precedents of the dark ages,
and if, as the Attorney-General says,
there is but a few years' transition from
reform agitation to chartist agitation, then,
in God's name, gentlemen, why should

there not be an alteration in the maehinery by which crimes have been punished
-why should there not be a practical
alteration in the laws of agitation, tumult,
and riots. Gentlemen, from the moment
the sever bishops were acquitted down to
the present time, the country has looked
upon juries as the mouthpiece of the national trumpet, which shall declare to the
country every indication that freedom
is attempted to be impeded. I can
well understand the words of the immortal Channing, that "man isa wild
beast, in want of a master, and only safe
in chains." You are called upon to-day
to give a verdict, never before anticipated
or looked to with the same anxiety. You
have brought before you by the strongest
government that ever existed in this
country, at least for many years, the most
paltry offence with which ever men were
charged. You have now a government,
which, powerful in its majority, ought not
to dread assaults of this nature, a gvernment which refused to hear ~ Tplcation of 3,500,000 men, for the People's
Charter,-which is to be relied upon as
our offence, for mind, in his reply, the
Attorney-General will endeavour to connect us with the tumult, which we were
wholly unconnected with. Whence are
we to derive the examples by which our
conduct is to be guarded ? Surely from
the house of commons. What do we
find ? Year after year petitions for the
Charter have been presented to the house
of commons; they are discussed; not
refused to be discussed, as they would be
if they were illegal and unconstitutional.
They are laid upon the table; though
the last was so big that it could not lie
hi the house, and, therefore, it could not
lie on the table at all; and the divisions
have been 65 or 66 in favour of this
treasonable question of the Charter. In
1839,the Whigs allowed us to sit in a convention, which the tories now tell us is
treason. I am now beginning to learn
that the sons are not better than their
fathers, that the Whigs allowed us to pursue the agitation of a question which the
tories tell us is treason. In that conferencer~ we sat two months, which were
spent in debating the question of a
sacred holiday, which was brought forward by Mr. Attwood in the house of
commons; speech upon speech was

302
inad'e; it n~s ,div'id'd upo. every day,- mit? He admitted tha t there was.no
property in
recommen'ding,- a cessation from labour,
in ordertocarry the-question. Willneighbourhood, and he attributed ta to
the Attorney-General say, " The-Whigs the pacific character of the speeches dewere weak, and dared not .prosecute livered at the various meetings It was
y"ou ;,we are. strong, and therefore will the speakers who stopped the disturbances.
prosecute VOU." Is that thei .relaxation Then we go to Brierly; he says he nevey
in the. law pointed out by the.Attorney- saw any'thing so tranquil, and that the
General, when so nobly defending his hands always turned out of their own acclient at Monmouth, when he. was ena- coid, and evidenced no disposition whatBut there is something
bled by his knowledge of the la,-at all' ever to riot.
events-by the ingenuity which he broughit more important still-something exceedto bear upon the case,-to save the life of ingly important-Buckley said he had
his client by .defending. him from the instructions from the magistrates to report
charge of high treason ? It has been to thei every thing he heard tending to
proved, that eight memnbers of parfliament a breach of the peace. Had lie reported
drew up the document called the People's. one word of the kind? not a word. You,
Charter. Then where are you to look for ,gentlemen, have watched the character of
have heared the
conspirators? In the House of Con- this evidence -You
inons ? Of -course, if it be illegal to!mannerin which, this evidence was got up,
agitate for the Charter, those who drew and how it was sought to be procured.
it up, and presented it to the'House of I You have heard ofthe state of Burnley,
Commons, must be in peril. But we you have had the constable of Burnley.
'Cahe, before you. What does he say?
f~er&, in addition to this great legal
authority (the House of Commons) the he says that just before this outbreak I
names of those eight members of parlia- was.iu North Lancashire Why did I go
rent affixed to this Charter. They to North Lancashire? why was I there ?
declared it. not only legal, but constitu. let us hear what he says: he was within
tional,, and that the people should not ten, yards of the pavilion where I was adabandon- it but stand by it. In prose- dressing a meeting. That pavilion;was
cuting the consideration of the evidence, erected by the middle classes when it
you will find that we make out our case served tht
f'ro6m the evidence from the Crown. Mr. 'Cabe was present for the purpose of
Wilcox, whose evidence is most import- -collecting evidence and giving it in a
ant, says, he was uneasy in his mind, digested, form to themagistras.-When
becaulse he. thought the.Chartistswere. to he w'as not able to attend himself he eme
b:ehetrapped; h-, has heard many of my,: ployed competent reporters who furnished
speeches-, and says, they all tended to, him with an account of all that was said.
preserve the peace of the country. Re :He wvas 'within ten -yards of me,-the
felt so, uneasy. in his mind,. in, conse- grand conspirator-and he never heard me
quence of the trick about to be played qn.: uttering aword. of -sedition. I. was taunted
us, that he went as far as Birmingham a little before this with being a coward by
on his way to Sir James Graham;. and the Times for' not going down to North
then lie returned, and wrote a letter to, Lancashire. I' received letters: from middle
Sir- James-. I was stopped-,' very pro- Class men and- others informing me of
perly, by his Lordship,., who decided the state -of the district, anrd, that several
that, the contents- of that letter could mills had* been burned. I. also received
ien
no We in evidence.- Then. look lIetters from workingn r~ stating that
at. the evidence of the cracked man. spies were among them. I went down
the
Look at the evidence of' the witnessi for a wveek and. what wa~fs result ?I
Buckley who came here under the, There was misehiet to property after.
Just, I left. I mighit appeal to the mannexpectation of" obtaining £X50
think of a strong gcovernment pi d ucing- facturers whbeituer they did not let their
such a witness, as that with, th . nope of hands turn-outv to hear my address. I
Z'50 flickeringr before his eyes,. and the, might aplpeal to -one anld all-to the
recollection.of" what hie had already re- manufacturers of. Blackburn, Brnley,
'ceived for-his 'Services.' What did he ad- Clitheroel, Colne,, and Lancaster, if- it

303

was not- my persevering effbrt during
the, whole of the week, to tranquillise thel
angry spirit that then prevailed in: that,
district. Why did I go? Because
Mri. Acland told me that there would
be a revolution, and that the mills would
be stopped in three weeks;---I told
the people the convulsion was come("struggle" was, not the word: that
word conveys to my mind a peaceful
contest) -and I told them for God's sake,
to fold their arms, and do nothing;.
for as sure as they did; those who urged
them on would be in the jury box,
while they would be in the dock. I did
tranquillise them ; and upon the hustings,
at Keighley, I was publicly chargedwith being a tory spy, paid by the
government to keep the country quiet;
with receiving money from the CarltonClub, because I had been traversing
Yorkshire, Lancashire, and Nottinghamshire, cautioning the people to be quiet,
having first had the intimation that the
mills were to be stopped. Well, the
turn-out having taken place, was it improper for us to say, "Now the strike has
arisen, let us endeavour to turn it to the
accomplishment of a particular object ?"
I am not here contending that no disturbances have taken place. It is hut natural to suppose that when the hands were
turned out they would become rash, unruly, aid agitated-that disposition on
their part we endeavoured to allay, but
as we did not turn- the hands out was it
not right for us to say, "Now, let us turn
the strike, so far as . the trades of Manchester are concerned; to the accomplish-.
ment of the People's Charter." If that
is illegal, that we did. But we deny that
the Chartists had any hand in turning
out the workpeople. IfI am asked whethlier we recommended those who wereout
on strike to join in the agitation for the
Charter, to that I plead " Guilty." We
hiave done thlat. We had a perfect right
to do so. 1*t see what it requires in the
mind of an honourable man to convict
an honourable gentleman of the crime of
conspiracy. 1 leave London on the 15th
to attend a meeting at Mr Scholefield's
chapel. That meeting was Hunt's anniversary. I am proved to be at every one
of those meetings for several years past
I leave London at the latest possible period to allow of my attending the meet-,

Ininn
tichester;- and' r leave :aMhns
chesteritmmediately after the conference
is over. I am never found in Manches,
ter afterwards daring the disturbances.
No act of mine that could, by ady possibility, constitute a conspiracy, has been
proved against me. I never leftliondon,
which is 200 miles pway from all those
scenes until long after the outbreak took
place. IfI had anticipated this conspiracy, or not having anticipated it if I had
linked myself to it, would I have borne
the character given me by the AttorneyGeneral ?-Would I, up to the period to
which his character extends, have been
destroying that very force with which I
hoped' to accomplish my own design
and that of others? No, gentlemen,
I can prove to you that firom the beginning to the end of the turn-out, I deprecated not only violence, but conspiracy,
riot, and every thing calculated to lead
to them. But, gentlemen, I shall not be
satisfied with resting solely on the case
made out for me by-the cro
ct
character wrung reluctantly from the
witnesses, but I shall produce to you the
authorities of Mancheater, the witnesses
whom the crown ought to have produced;'
and I shall also call evidence to show
that, from the time I returned to London,
all my letters, private and public, were
directed to a place, where they were all
opened; and, on .the 24th, I published
a notification in a daily paper, that any
improper letter addressed to me should
be returned open through the post,
marked, "Matter improper contained in
this letter." But I will produce to you
mill-owners, men of property, influence,
and character, who have known me seven
or eight years, who shall speak to my
character, and the effect my speeches
have had on public meetings in the several localities where I have been, If this
does not satisfy you I don't know what
will. As to the poor conspirator Crossley, so good a character has been given
of him, that I think there will be nothing
like an attempt to send him to the jury .
And then these other men who defend
themselves,-why are they put altogether
in this indictment? The evidence affecting each is so different in character,
that you, gentlemen, must naturally ask
why are they all thrown together in a
Gentlemen, we are not all
bundle.

304
charged with the same transactions, but
in this indictment we are thrown down
before you in one common heap; but
take care and pick Feargus O'Connor
out at all events, have the red cat, gentlemen, under any circumstances. If the
conspiracy be not strong enough to catch
him, have a bit of tumult; if tumultbe not
strong enough, as they have abandoned the
riot, why, have a bit of illegal assembling;
but take care, the net is drawn for you;
take care and don't let the big fish escape.
Gentlemen, I look upon this trial as an
act of grace; as a God-send. Nothing
so much proves the weakness of a government-strong though they may be in majorities in the Houses of Parliament-as
the desire to put down public discussion.
A majority of the Hoilse of Commons is
one thing; a majority of the public mind
is another thing; and powerful though
their majority may be, it cannot stand
for a month against well-digested public
opinion. Gentlemen, what ought to be
the oonstiution of the country? It ought
to be the best digest of the living genius
,of the day, and such is the Charter.
Gentlemen, there is not one point in the
Charter that is not recognized by the
government. You have the ballot, and
You have
no property qualification.
heard that the Scotch members require
no property qualification; you might be
told that the university members require
none; but how is universal suffrage practically admitted by this strong government? When the Attorney-General was
cracking jokes on the pot-boys of Huntingdon-and certainly they were the only
good jokes I heard during that election
contest-he was glad enough to hear the
"rat tat too" of the chartists coming to
his assistance, when we placed upon our
banners, "Down with the Whigs." Then
all liberty and license was given to those
who helped them into place and power;
but having once got possession, like wily
tenants, they now dispute the title of the
lessee; because they think themselves
safe and secure. The Whigs when they
got into power evinced the same disregard
ofpublic opinion, and were,consequently,
sent to the back-side of the treasury, but
the same disregard which the Whigs
showed to public opinion, will have
the same effect in driving this strong government from the position it now holds.

Gentlemen, you must haved seen that it
was my intention in the commencement
of these proceedings, to carry the war into
the enemies' camp, on the doctrine of presumption, by shewing what party had
used language most calculated to lead to
the offences charged in this indictment.
But I have abandoned that intention.
And why ? Not because I did not think
that much stronger language had not
been used by the party to which I alluded, than ever was employed by the
Chartist body, but because I would not
be a party in making out a case for the
prosecution of others. Conspirator as I
am, I trust I have honour enotgh not
to seek to make out a case against others.
You may be astonished, from the drift of
my cross-examination, that I do not do
it. I have assigned to you a reason-a
fair and honourable reason why I have
abstained from that course. If it had
not been for the manner in which this
case has been conducted-if it had not
been for the patience with which you
appear to have attended to everything, even the most irrelevant and
minute, I should occupy your attention at much greater length. But,
gentlemen of the jury, having stated
to you the conclusion to which you must
come before you can find me guiltyhaving stated to you that I can produce
evidence, not only to my character but to
speak to all those transactions n which
I have been engaged-I shall produce
one witness who has known me from infancy, and the Attorney-General may
examine him as long as he pleases. Gentlemen, before I conclude I shall make
an appeal to you-not in such eloquent
language.as that of the Attorney-General,
because I am not so highly gilted as the
learned gentleman, but in the saine spirit
-and I shall read to you the words
which he employed in addressing the
jury at Monmouth, when he showed the
absolute necessity there wao of acquitting
the Chartists then on trial, by the moral
effect which such acquittal would produce
on the public mind. Circumstances have
not been materially altered from 1839 to
1843, unless indeed it be that the public
intellect is a little more quickened. But
give me leave to ask you a plain and
silmple question. May we not recognize
in the acts of the Executive a cause for

305
some of the transactions out of which this
enquiry has arisen ? Gentlemen, you
may recollect that, in July or August,
after parliament had been prorogued, an
attempt was made to suppress public
opinion and public meetings. Why was
I going to put in the evidence of the
moving cause to the late outbreak, which
I have now abstained from ? Was it that,
though antagonist to that party, I did not
try them ? It is because we live in a free
country. I thank God-and I say it
with pride and pleasure-that we live in
such a country. Administer the law as
the law ought to be administered, and
there is no such country under heavenbut strain and thwart the law and there
is not in any nation such machinery for
persecution. The most suicidal policy
that any country ever adopted was, to
attempt to put down public meetings.
Look to other countries where public opi*sion has been smothered, and consider
the result. The Attorney-General and
the Government ought to be obliged to
us; for, as Junius has well said, " This
agitation is like the hue and cry: it announces the thief's approach."
Why
have we been able to keep down the irritated mind of the people, irritated, sour,
and sore, and writhing under the infliction
of the most insulting wrongs ? How have
we been able to keep down the turbulence
of these men ? It is entirely by the hope
of getting this Charter; because they live
in the hope of getting it by this peaceful
struggle. But I have no apprehension of
any otherprinciple supersedingor out-topping the all-important question of the
Charter in the House of Commons. But
the people would not fight for it. Certain
parties had endeavoured to direct public
attention away from the Charter to another
question, but without success. They have
failed. Why ? Because they were not
able to create a revolution. Those who
seek the obtainment of the Charter would
not accept it unless it were obtained
by peaceable means. They seek it by
peaceful agitation; and so long as the
public mind is allowed to be expressed on the public platform, so long
will there be a national safety-valve;
but once suppress that, and then, as was
the case in France, you may go to bed in
peace, and arise with the barricades around
you. In France the discontent of a sin-

gle college, school, association or worl
shop, can lead to a revolt; why cannot
such be the case in England ? Because Englishmen won't fight, unless
they know what they are fighting
for. Because men of principle won't
have recourse to physical force. But
the Attorney-General went nearly too
far. He was nearly proving high treason against us. He adduced evidence to
show that we were going to take the
Horse Guards and take the Arsenal!
With what ? With four rusty doublebarrelled guns and a few single ones !
Just think of an attempt to destroy the
iron Duke, and the strong government,
with four rusty double-barrelled guns
All we wanted was commanders to make
us invincible, and to prevent the possibility of our opponents gaining a triumph over us! Gentlemen, if I had
not consulted my feelings, and that duty
I owe to the Court, for the dignified
manner in which this case has been
conducted, I should have ended as I
began, and treated it as a melo-dramatic
production-a fairy tale-as an act of
necessity to alarm the minds of the
landed proprietors. If nothing is done
for the people, something must be done,
to show a reason why nothing has been
done. What a story the minister will
now have to tell the landed-proprietors"Now you see the danger you were in.
Now you see the reason for my tariff;
now you see the advantages of the
sliding-scale, as well as the jeopardy in
which you were placed. Nothing less
was intended than the violation of all
property, and a general distribution or
the land.
Did not I tell you these
Chartists were the men. Now, landlords, unite as yeomanry, as magistrates,
as landed-proprietors-put the Chartists
down first, and when they are down
then we will try to put down the league
afterwards. The Chartists are too poorthey are not entitled to the franchise,
and - therefore they will be unable to
make any defence. Having first refused
an enquiry into their state-having first
trampled on the right of Britons, we will
tear them up by piecemeal-having first
routed the grand army we will cut the
stragglers up in detail." The AttorneyGeneral, in his opening speech, observed
all that prudence, moderation, and caln-

30(4

ness, which is his wont, but such of
you as are fishermen will recollect having
seen the gilded fly seducing the unconscious fish, who, when he began to nibble, little knew that there was a hook at
the end of it. Gentlemen, there was a
hook at the end of the Attorney-General's line. That hook still remains to be
played. You know how the trout and
salmon are played in the river. You
know what it is to be captivated by the
gilded fly, and you must be cautious in
giving your verdict, lest, like the unwary
fish, you may be reduced when you
least expect it. I have told you that
you should have the whole case from me.
You shall have the whole case from me.
Swent to Mr. Scholefield's on the 16th
I did so because I was
of August.
aware that I should learn from him what
the proceedings were to be. I solemnly
declare that, from the beginning to the
end, he had as much to do with that
conference meeting as you had, and no
more. There is a communication between Mr. Scholefield's house and the
grave yard, through the chapel where we
were sitting. Mr. Scholefield in going
to the grave yard, was obliged to pass
through the chapel. This will account
for his being occasionally seen in the
chapel during the sitting of the conference. It was sworn that he was present
on many occasions. Now, I will swear,
that on one occasion I have seen him
taking a raven from the back yard
through the chapel. It was at myrequest that Mr. Scholefield gave us the
use of that chapel. It was I that asked
him to permit the delegates to meet there.
Why? Because when Dr. M'Douall engaged a room to hold eighteen persons,
only that number of delegates was expected, but double that number came;
and as there were many persons crowding about the door, and much excitement ensued, I said " We will get some
place to meet in where we won't be
watched, and where there will be no
danger of bringing the people into collision with the authorities."- I, accordingly, applied to Mr. Scholefield for the
use of his chapel. He told me that his
son _kept a school in it, and hoped no
damage would be done to it. 'From
-wy regard to you" said he " and your
u"dertaking that no damage will be

dane to, the chapel, I wilgive it to you,;
but you will guasantee :that yon will
only have it daily, and up to the timb
originally ittended for holding these
meetings.', You have it then from Miss
DoUall only remained at
Noblett, that
her mother's an hour and a balf. That
is the history of the transaction, which
the Attorney-General will endeavour to
explain away as soon as he comes
to reply-and reply he most assuredly
will, as he has a right to do. But let
us see what value the Attorney-General
put on the acquittal of the Chartists tried
at Newport, and apply it here. At Newport the prisoners were charged with high
treason, and let us see what importance
the Attorney-General attached to an acquittal in that case, and whether the same
reasons do not apply with much greater
force in favour of an acquittal here. The
learned gentleman spoke thus:
" Gentlemen, under these circumstances, I
again say that I know of no public measure thA
would tend so much to the honour of the country,
to the peace of the community, to the quieting of
that alarm which this lamentable transaction has
created,'than a verdict of not guilty, if that verdict can be pronounced with truth. It is no
question whether you can safely pronounce that
verdict; the single question is, can you pronounce it with truth ? If you can, it would be
the largest measure of safety to the country. If
you can assure her Majesty's subjects in all parts
of her domionions here, that these thousands
upon thousands did not meditate rebellion; that
their object was to enforce some claims on behalf of a suffering brother Chartist: that the accidental circumstance of their finding persons
whom they were determined to rescue at the
spot where they had meant to make only a demonstration of strength, led to violence, and that
the instant they found that lead to bloody resistance, they fled with terror and 'dismay from a
field that they never had intended to enter-such
an assurance will be attended by the best results.
I say, gentlemen, that nothing could occur so
much to re-assure this county, and the kingdom
at large, as the verdict Not Guilty, if you can
truly pronounce it; and I believe there would
be more safety in that verdict, if true, than if
10,000 troops were parading the different parts
of this county to enforce obedience to the law at
the point of the sword."

Now, in commenting on that the Attorney-General may meet this by observing
Well, I say so stillprovidcd you can
But,
find such a verdict iA'li truth.'

307
gentlemen, weigh the moral effect which
oh - a ednvietibn as that now sought
would produce, against that which would
result from :an acquittal. Do not take it
as the Attorney-General would take it,singly and alone; but in combination
with other circumstances, especially with
the ioral effect which an acquittal would.
produce on the country at large. Gentiemen of the jury, this is, perhaps, one
6f the most important trials that ever
took place in a court of justice. Gentlemen, a new precedent has been established in this case. Here are fifty-nine persoins mixed up together in a legal hodgepodge, well designated a monster indictment by Mr. Baines, for it requires every
defendant to be almost a lawyer before
he can understand it. Gentlemen, as a
barrister, myself, I must say that all that
ability could do-all that talent could doall that vigilance could do-has been done
qn the part of the prosecutors here. The
law of-libel, no doubt, will be critically explained to you, and what part I had in this
alleged conspiracy will be again brought
under your notice; but, gentlemen, if the
act of one does bind others, it will only
be so far as they agree in the furtherance of the common design, and to
the-same design. There may be a severance in the jury box, but, gentlemen,
remember that the eleven are not to carry
the whole case while one dissents, but
that every man must carry the whole
case. It is not at all necessary if a man
conscientiously differ from another, that,
fbr the sake of convenience,evidence should
he let in to prove the existence of a conspiracy. Recollect that it is not for the
sake of convenience you are to try this
cause, but for the sake of right-for the
sake of law--for the purpose not only
of tranquillizing the country, (a circumstance upon which the Attorney-General
laid so much stress) but for the purpose
of seeing whether there has been enough
proved by the evidence for the crown to
justify you, by the doctrine of presumption, in coming to the monstrous conclusion, that these defendants were the fomenters of the strike which commenced
in the early part of August, or that, not
having originated the strike they had
taken hold of the machinery, then in
operation, for the purpose of carrying onsj
bh uml3 and riot,that w1hich-was begun

by others. Gentlemen, I was not aware
at, the commencement of these proceedings, that one of your number was a
committing magistrate and Corn-law-repealer. I am now happy to find that no
objection was taken to that gentlemanrs
remaining on the jury, by any of the
defendants. Because, if my case is good,
I can rely on the honour of that juryman. But, if my case is bad, I should
not expect an acquittal from any jury.
My case, however, is so good that I ecan
allow the very men who are opposed to
me in politics to remain on the jury:
that circumstance is, in itself, a prima
facie evidence of my innocence.
I
might have made several technical objections to a portion of the evidence
elicited, and to several of the documents
proved during this trial, but I have not
done so. I have done, however, what the
Attorney-General ought to have done.
I have endeavoured to supply that gap
which he has left in the case for the
prosecution.
He certainly left it a
one-sided--a one handed affair, and I
have endeavoured to supply the other
hand in order that you may have the
whole case before you. So far as I am
personally concerned, if a verdict of aequittal be necessary, it can only be for
the clearing of my honour from those
foul aspersions which have been cast upon
it. It is to that I look, gentlemen, for
otherwise, I think, legally speaking, I
may look with confidence for an acquittal
at your hands. I now leave my case
confidently with you. You will not only
carry in to the jury box what you have
heard, but also what you have seen; ai,
in these days of phrenology and physio-.
logy, if you have watched the faces of
the defendants and find them guilty of
conspiracy, you must also by implication
find them guilty of hypocrisy. Gentlemen, I trust you will find them to be
what I have found them. I have associated
With them for some time and esteemed
itan honour to do so. I have searched
into their characters foryears, and in these
times of searching scrutiny it is something for..
a gentleman ,elonging- to 7the
order of the Aristocracy, to have conhudence in the working classes. I have
been able to do it by greatenergy, auritiring watchfulness, -- nd preserving my
a
1haraeter so pureIthat ot ntsingle missile

308
has been aimed at it, except in my
character as a demagogue and Chartist
leader. Gentlemen, I am a demagogue,
in the real sense of the word, but I am
not a political trafficker. I ama Chartist,
but I declare to you, solemnly, that I
would not accept the Charter to morrow
at the expense of shedding one drop of
human blood. I have a right as well as the
Tories to push forward my political principles. You may well understand that if
those principles which once formed the great
basis of the constitution, were superseded
by others without treason, there can be
no treason in endeavouring to substitute
new principles for the constitution now in
existence. You have heard of the glorious revolution to which you owe your
present constitution, and I hope that I
shall be instrumental in producing an important change in this constitution, and
that in such a way that those who come
after me will not be horrified by calling
it a bloody revolution. We seek a moral revolution, based on jistice; we seek
to effect this revolution, not by the clang
of arms-not by the discharge of musketry-not by the roar of artillery, but,
by the peaceful struggle of right against
might-ofjusticelagainst injustice-and of
knowledge against bigotry and intolerance. In conclusion I have only to say,
that Mr. Justice Coleridge rejected the
evidence of a reporter because he gave
only garbled extracts from his notes, and
not the whole of the speeches. You will
remember these things. Remember the
riht of free expression is a thing not ono be permitted, but to be preserved,
by a jury of Englishmen. Gentlemen,
I look with intense anxiety, on account
of my country at large, bforthe verdict
you will give. You are the organ, gentlemen, and if it be resounded from that
jury-box, that prosecutions for holding
political principles will no longer be entertained in courts of justice, there will
be no more conspiracies; the moral influence of intelligence will put to flight
the crotchets of the most crotchetty.
You will find more safety in that course
than in any other you can pursue, gen,.
tlemen, inasmuch as Sir James Graham
said that we require an investigation, inasmuch as Lord Brougham said that we
require an investigation into'the origin o'f
the late disturbances, and that that in-

vestigation would take place during the
examination of those in the indictment. I
now leave the whole case in your hands;
trusting that you will pronounce by your
verdict that the day is not yet come when
free discussion is to be put down; but
that byan honorable acquittal, which the
evidence adduced will amply justify you
in pronouncing, you will add another
link to the triumph which the cause of
truth and justice has achieved in this
country, and which I conscientiously believe is hastenig on to its final accomplishment. Gentlemen, I leave the whole
case in your hands, being conscious that
no complaint can be made as to the
manner in which it was brought forward
-that no complaint can be made as to
the manner in which it was entertained,
and, I believe, gentlemen, we can complete the link of triumph and satisfaction
by adding that no complaint can be made
as to the manner in which it will be decided.
Mr. O'CONNOR resumed his seat
at twenty minutes past eleven o'clock,
having spoken two hours and twenty
minutes.
Wmr. SCHOLEFIELD, examined by Mr.
COBBETT:-Are you son of the defendant,
James Scholefield? Yes. Do you reside with
your father? Yes. On the 16th of August did
Mr. Feargus O'Connor come to your father's
house ? Yes. Did he sleep at your house that
night? Yes. On the 16th of August? Yes,
sir. Can you tell me when he went to bed ? I
don't know, sir. Can you say at what time he
was called, or at what time did he get up the
next morning ? About nine o'clock.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-He is talking about another morning.
Mr. COBBETT:-Did Mr. O'Connor go to
bed on his arrival in Manchester, on the 16th?
Witness:-Yes. At what time? About six
o'clock. Do you recollect at what time he was
called ?- At half-past two. During the day
time ?-Yes. What are you ?-A schoolmaster.
Is your school attached to the chapel ?--Yes.
My sister teaches in the girls' school, Can you
say at what time did Mr. O'Connor arrive in
the morning ?-At half-past five o'clock. Where
was your father when Mr. O'Connor arrived ?He was out. Can you recollect whether Mr.
O'Connor arrived unexpectedly or otherwise.We did not expect him. Do you know what

309
your rther was then about ? Yes; he went to
get some placards printed. Was a bed prepared
for Mr. O'Connor? No, he had to wait till a
bed was prepared. Did ybur father get up early
i-the morning ? Yes. Will you look at that
placard now ? [Handing it to witness.] Was that
the placard your father went to get printed ?Yes.
The following placard was then entered as
read :" PROCESSION AND MEETING PROHIBITED BY THE AUTHORITIES.
" The committee for the erection of Hunt's
Monument respectfully inform the public, that
in consequence of the very unexpected excitement of the town of Manchester and its
vicinity, occasioned by a turn-out for an
advance of wages, they have decided that the
procession and meeting in Mr. Scholefield's
premises, as announced in former bills for the
16th of August, 1842, will not take place, lest it
should give an opportunity to increase that excitement, the odium and consequences of which
have been attempted to be fixed on the Chartist
body.
" The tea party and ball, as by former bills,
will take place in the evening, at Carpenters'
Hall.
" N. B. A number of very neat China models
of the monument have arrived, and will be exposed for sale on that day, at from Is. 4d. to
Is. 6d. each; the profits of which are for the
funds of the monument.
" J. SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
Did you see many of them ? Yes, I saw many
of them that day in the town. Have you seen
that before ? Yes. I believe it is a placard
postponing the meeting ? Yes. What time of
the day was it on the 16th, when you saw that
placard first ? I saw it about six o'clock in the
morning. Now, who is the printer of that placard?
Mr.Kiernan. Did you ever see any of those placards ? Yes, I put a few on boards and went to see
them posted about the streets. Did any one else
bring any ? Yes. Who else? Kiernan's journeyman. Are you aware of the quantity brought ?
About 200 or 300. What time did your father
go out of the house ? About four o'clock in
the morning. On the 17th of August did you
see your father ? Yes. In what way was he
engaged during that day? He was chiefly in
the surgery during that day. Do you know
whether there was any, and what, business
gping on in the back burying-ground that would
call his attention that way ? There was a man
there painting some gates, and the sexton was
at work there. I there a buryin-round

there, and is it situated so that the chapel is
between it and the house? Yes. Now, to go
to those premises from the house, which would
be the ordinary and regular way? To go
through the chapel. Is there any other way?
Yes, but the regular way for our family is
through the chapel. Look at that placard.
[Handing a placard to witness.] Is that one of
the same placards ? Yes, sir.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-Are
you aware, that about five or six o'clock that
evening, I requested your father to go down to
the Carpenter's Hall to make an apology that I
could not go down that evening, in consequence
of the excited state of the town? Do you recollect my speaking to a man named Cockshott
Yes. Do you reand sending for a cab?
collect your sister and the whole family being
present, and a long discussion taking place as
to whether it would be prudent for me to go
to Carpenter's Hall, or not, and that the
result of that consultation was, that your father
should go and apologise for my non-appearance ? Yes.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I think you said your father went to
Carpenters' Hall with some message ? Yes.
Did he go? Yes. How long did he stayF
About half an hour. What evening was that?
The 16th of August. Who was at home that
evening? I was at home that evening. I was
in the surgery. Who was in the chapel that.
night? I don't know. I did not go in. Do
you mean to say you have no means of telling
me how many there were there ? I don't know,
sir. Whether four, or five, or twenty ? I don't
know. How do you know there were fifty
persons there on the night of the 16th?
Because I heard a few persons pass the surgery window. What time did they go in?
About six or seven o'clock. What time did they
ftay ? I don't know. Did you see them come
out again? No, I went to bed about ten o'clock.
Did they remain there till you went to bed ?
Yes. Then, when you went to bed, you left#
those persons in the chapel ? Yes. Was it
lighted up? Yes. Now, I beg to ask Mr.
Scholefield-you are a young man-Now) upon
your oath, did you not know any one who was
in that chapel that night? None, except Mr.
O'Connor. How came he to be there? He was
in our house, and he went into the chapel. Who
furnished the candles ? I don't know, unless it
was my brother. Is he here-? No, sir. "What
time did Mr. O'Connor go into the Chaler r

x

3I~
Wheniy father went to Carpenters' Hall What who would open the door? Any body that
time was that ?-It might be a little after seven wanted to speak to him might go into the surO'clock. And he remained there till you went to gery and speak to him.
bed at ten? Yes. Well, you saw persons pass
The JUDGE---You say it was at five o'cloqk
the surgery window? I say I heard them. I
Mr. O'Connor wanted your father to go to Car.
did not say I saw them. How many passed?
Five or six? I dare say. Any more? Not to penters' Hall ? There was a discussion about
mny knowledge. Do you mean to say that, upon whether he should go at that time. How long
your oath, you believe there were less than ten after that was it when your father went ? About
persons there? I cannot say how many. I heard three-quarters of an hour.
Mr. COBBETT:-I don't know whether your
a fdw pass, but how many I cannot tell. What
time did they pass ? About seven or eight o'clock. Lordship has it, that it was about six, or half-past
You cannot tell how many ? No, sir. There six, his father went to Carpenters' Hall.
might be a dozen? There might, for anything I
The JUDGE :-About seven.
know of. Your father, you say, returned from
JOHN NORTHCOTE, examined by Mr.COBCarpenters' Hall in half an hour? Yes. And BETT
:-What is your name? John Northeote.
where did he go then? He went to the surgery.
Did he remain there with you? Yes, sir. He Are you a servant to Mr. Kiernan, the printer?
never went into the chapel that evening ? No. Yes. Where does he live? At No. 5, George
What time did your father go to bed, or did you Leigh-street, Manchester. Do you recollect him
leave him sitting up ? I left him in the surgery. printing bills in August last, for Mr. Scholefield
Were you at Carpenters' Hall? No, sir. You the defendant ? Yes.
did not go there at all? No. Did you see anyA bill, of which the following is a copy, was
thing of the Executive Placard anywhere ? Not put into the hands of witness:till I saw it in the streets a few days afterwards. " PROCESSION AND MEETING PROHI.
Did you see it afterwards-You say this was on
BITED BY THE AUTHORITIES.
Wednesday the 17th ? No, sir, I did not see it
"The committee for the erection of Hunt's
afterwards. Not anywhere? No. Can you unmonument respectfully informs the public, that,
dertake to swear that you never afterwards saw
any copies of it whatever ? No, not till the in consequence of the very unexpected excite.
Thursday. Did you happen to go by Leach's ? ment of the town of Manchester and its vicinity,
No, sir. That was out of the way you were likely occasioned by the ' Turn-out for an advance of
to go ? Yes, sir. Did any man come to your wages,' they have decided that the procession,
father's during the meeting in the chapel, on the as announced in former bills, for the 16th of
17th, with any information of Turner's being August, 1842, ' will niot take place,' lest it should
arrested ? No. Then I presume I may ask you, give an opportunity to increase that excitement,
did you know that during the meeting of Wed- the odium and consequences of which have
been
nesday, that Turner, the printer of that placard,
attempted to be fixed on the Chartist body.
had been arrested ? No, sir; I did not. I never
" The tea-party and ball, as by former bills,
heard of him.
will take place in the evening at Carpenters'
The JUDGE :-Not on the 17th.
Hall.
WITNESS:-No, my Lord,
"N.B. A number of very neat China models
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--Do you re- of the monument have arrived, and will be
excollect your father going into the chapel to make posed for sale on that day, at from one shilling
any communication to the people assembled and four-pence to one shilling and
sixpence
there? He went in about four o'clock. Did each, the profits of which are
for the funds of
any body come and give your father information? the monument.
Not that I know of, sir. I was in the school
"JAMES SCHOLEFIELD, Chairman."
the whole day. And probably you would not Do you recollect any of those
bills being sent
know what persons came to your father's ? No, to Mr. Scholefield ?
Yes. Who took them ?
sir. Are you aware who would know what per- The younger
Mr. Scholefield took a few of them
sons came, and what information would be con- before seven o'clock
on the morning of the
veyed to your father? No, sir. Would your 17th. Who
took the rest ? I rather think it was
brother? He would be with me in the school. the poster. I took
some up myself. At what time?
Where was your father? He might be in the. From
ten o'clock to half-past. Did you see the
surgery. Then suppose any person .came to elder Mr.
Scholefield ? Yes, Did you see him
Comunuicate that information to your father, darly in
athe mornizing or not ? I saw him at half.-

311
past live o'clock, as nearly as I can remember
Where did you see him ? At the office door..
What was he doing there? He came with an
order for my master to print 500 bills prohibiting
the meeting and procession that were to take
place that day. Did you hear Mr. Scholefield
,expressing a wish to have them down early?
He appeared anxious td have them out soon.
Do you know whether the quantity ordered was
sufficient in the ordinary way, to post the town ?
Yes, doubly sufficient.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENE.
RAL :-Look at that and tell me whether your
master printed that:-[The following placard is
handed to witness:
RUN FOR GOLD.
"Run for gold .- Labour is suspended ; public
credit is shaken; paper is worthless; run for
gold. Every sovereign is now worth thirty shillings. Paper cannot be cashed. Run, middle
-cass men, trades, odd-fellows, sick clubs, money
clubs, to the savings banks and all banks for
gold ! gold !! gold ! !"] Yes. How many did he
print? I believe 300 was the amount of the
order.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-That placard
is in evidence, my Lord. To witness] When
was that printed ?-Was it printed before or after
Mr. Scholefield's ? It was printed before Mr.
Scholefield's. It was printed on the Monday.
That would be Monday the 15th or the 8th ? I
cannot tell which, but I am sure it was printed
on the Monday. Was it printed before the people marched to Manchester ? No, sir. Then I
dare say you can fix the date very clearly ? I believe it would be printed the day before Mr.
Scholefield got the others printed. Who ordered
it ? I cannot say. Who came for them. I saw
either three or four posters with them, but I cannot swear to them. The bill posters came for
those bills? Yes, sir. Very good.
Re-examined by Mr. COBBETT:- I believe
your master prints all kinds of bills and placards ? Yes. And sometimes a number of various kinds of placards are printed during the
same week? O yes, sir, there might be half a dozen
of different sorts of placards printed in one week.
JOHN BROOK examined by Mr. COBBETT:
- What is your name ? John Brook. Are you
a relation of Mr. Scholefield ? Yes,a brother-inlaw. I married his sister. What is your business generally? A cabinet maker. Were you,
in last August, at work for Mr. Scholefield on his
premises? Yes. Were you there- e-4 16th

and 17th of August? Yes. What sort of biis~ness were you about? Joiner's work and paint.
ing. Were you in his house on the 17th ? Yes,
in the house, and about the premises. Did you
observe how Mr. Scholefield was engaged that
day, or the greater part of it ? Yes, I went into
his surgery for instructions concerning the work.
Had you any gates to paint for him ? Yes, sir.
Whereabouts are they situated ? In the lower
yard. Whereabouts are those gates situated--ia
the front or back part ? In the back part. Is there
an upper yard and a lower one ? Yes. Was it
in the back yard, or burying ground, that you
were ? They are all three burying grounds. There
are three yards, and there are gates between the
upper and lower ones; and I was painting those
gates all th day. Was the chapel situated between those gates and the house? Yes. While
so engaged painting the gates, did you see anything of Mr. Scholefield ? Yes, I saw him several times. He came down to me while I was
painting those gates. Can you tell in what direction he came to you ?-was it through the
chapel, or how? He did come, sir :-Do you
know that he came through the chapel ? Yes,
through the chapel, from the surgery.
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-Well,
Brook, were you at work at Mr. Scholefield's on
the 16th. Yes. At what hour? On the 16th I was
there soon after five o'clock. Do you recollect
me arriving there ? Yes, I recollect Mr. O'Connor coming.-You are a gentleman, I see. Do
you recollect me waiting till Mr. Scholefield
arrived from the printer's ? Yes, I opened the door
for you to come in. I believe you did not expect
me ? No. Do you recollect my going to bed?
Yes. About what hour ? Soon after six, I think,
sir, as near as I can recollect. Do you recollect
at what hour I was' called ? I heard you telling
Mr. Scholefield that you did not wish to be called till three o'clock in the afternoon. Are you
aware that Mr. Scholefield has a raven ? Yes.
Do you know that it is a common practice for
that raven to be brought in through the chapel to
befed ? No, sir, it is a jackdaw, not a raven.
Well, it is the biggest jackdaw I ever saw.
But do you know Ralph the raven ? Yes.
Well, then, I suppose you call him a jackdaw ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Not the
raven.
WITNESS :-Mr. Scholefield has a jackdaw
and a raven.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Well, I mistook the
raven for the jackdaw-which is the conspirator ?
(Laughter.) Do you know a man namedl

312
Griffin? I do, sir. Do you recollect any time
when Mr. Scholefield, out of charity, gave him
some work to do? Yes. When you were at
work with Griffin had you any conversation
about me ? Yes, repeatedly. Now, did I ever
speak a word to you in my life till you came up
to me at the station on Wednesday ? No. Had
you any conversation with me about this ? What
about the trial ?
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Yes.
WITNESS:--No, I never had any conversation with you since you spoke to me on the 16th
of August.. Well, what did Griffin say to you
about losing his situation ? He said he lost it,
and did not know what for. He said he would
walk into you, and be revenged on you. I said"You cannot upon Mr. O'Connor, man."-He
said, " But I can, and you will be surprised when
you hear it." When was this ? It wasin August.
In the beginning of August? Yes; we were then
painting Scholefield's chapel. Was this before I
arrived in Manchester? Yes. How long before ?
Weeks before. I cannot remember how long.
But you heard him say he would walk into me,
and be revenged of me ? Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Now, Mr.
Brook, go home:and feed the raven and thejackand
ldaw, take care you feed the right one.
Mr. O'CONNOR :- The conspirator !(Laughter.)
WITNESS :-Are we to make a distinction
between them, sir ?
JOHN COCKSHOTT, examined by Mr. COBBETT:-What are you ? Iam a butcher in Man.
chester. Do you know Mr. Scholefield the defendant ? Yes. Were you at his house on the
17th of August last ? I was. At what time of
the day was it? From ten till eleven o'clock in
the morning.
'Mr. O'CONNOR:-What day?
Mr. COBBETT :-The 17th of August last
between ten and eleven in the morning. [To
witness] What time did you go to Mr. Scholefield's? Between 10 and 11 o'clock. For some
medicine for one of your family ? Yes. Did you
see Mr. Scholefield? Yes. Where? In his surgery. Can you tell me what he was about? He
had a few patients in, that he was giving bottles
of minedicine to. Did you perceive him doing
anything else? Yes, there were some people begging tickets of him for soup. Did you see him
giving any tickets to any of them ? I did, sir.
Now do you happen to know where those tickets
that he was distributing came from? Do you
know any charitable persons in Manchester who
give charity in that way?-

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--We may assume that, my lord.
HENRY HOLLAND, examined by Mr. O'
CONNOR:-What are you, Mr. Holland ? I am
a block cutter to calico printers at Burnley, and
I also keep a temperance coffee house. Are you
a temperance man yourself? I am sir; I am in
the 5th year of teetotalism. Previous to August
last were the working men in a state of reat excitement in consequence of the factories working short time ? Yes. In consequence of that,
was there great excitement among all classes ?
Yes. Can you say of your own knowledge, that,
in consequence of that excitement, there was
strong apprehension of danger ? Yes. Do you
remember many public meetings of an exciting
nature about that time ? There was, sir. Now,
sir, do you remember making any communication to me in consequence of that excitementabout the latter end of July, or the beginning of
August-at all events about the 26th of July,
when the Attorney-General said there was a
meeting at Mottram moor? Yes. Do you remember having communicated with me
as to the state of the district? I do. Did
you request me to go down, and endeavour
to allay the angry feelings that existed? I did.
One of the defendants now in Court (Beesley,)
and myself, met together, in consequence of
the excited state of the neighbourhood, and
agreed to write to you, requesting you to come
down as soon as you possibly could to allay the
excitement then existing in the neighbourhood.
On your oath, did I go down as soon afterwards
as possible? Yes. Did you attend a meeting
I addressed on that occasion? I did, sir, at
Burnley, and at Colne. Were these meetings
large ? Yes. And numerously attended by all
classes of the town'? Yes. Now, sir, upon
your oath, what was the general tendency of
my addresses, both at Burnley and Colne?
They were calculated to allay the excitement.
Was there some damage done to the mills
before I went down ? There was, sir. There
was a mill burned before you went down. I
suppose it was the work of an incendiary. Pla.
cards were published, and distributed, offering
a reward for the discovery of the perpetrator of
the crime: Did my speech tend to expose the
abomination and wickedness of such practices ?
It did. Did I notfrefer'to that fact, and express
detestation of it? You did, most emphatically.
Did not I tell the people that the way to

impede the progress of the hatiter was to comrn-not from any great distance. &d the Colud
mit violence of that kind ?
people come there? Yes, but very few. Did they
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-My Lord, come from Bacup ? Yes, I believe they came
1 object to that.
from Bacup.
When was the Colne meeting
'Ir. O'CONNOR :-Well, I ill ask it in held ? The day following the meeting at Burnley.
:another w.k-. I am afraid I am going to alarm How came you to go there? I went to hear Mr.
ou now
a meeting of the shop- O'Connor speak : I took an interest in the proere
connection
with Colne
'keepers and mtiddle classes? Yes, a public ceedings. What my anxiety have you time to allay
No more than
atthe
meeting, called by public advertisement. At the anxiety. It wasthat which induced meto be
meeting, called
pblic
that meeting were all the points of the Charter present. How many people were there
to allay
adopted ? They were, sir. Unanimously agreed the anxiety ? A great many. Where was the
to by the meeting of shopkeepers ? Yes, una- meeting held? In the Peace Hall, which was the
nimously agreed to.
largest room in the town. Did any one go with
Mr. O'CONNOR :-[To the Attorney-Gene- you to that meeting?-Do you know Beesley?
ral.] What do you think of that ? [To the Yes. Was he at the Colne meeting? Yes. Anywitness.] Were all the points of the Charter where else.Ackrington. How far is that from
Burnley? Five and a half miles. What is
adopted?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I object Beesley? He is a chair maker. Do you know
to that.
whether he was elected a delegate ?-Where
To some conference?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Were the military and to ? To Manchester.
police sent out to repress violence ? Yes. I ask O, I only know it by hearsay. Do you know
whether or no my addresses at Colne went to it from him ? No. But he lives at Ackrington,
allay the angry feelings of all classes? They did, and he came to this meeting at Burnley? Yes, t
quiet things, and he did all he possibly could.
sir. most effectuallv
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENEThe JUDGE :-To do what? Witness :RAL :-When did the meeting at Burnley take To allay the excitement then existing.
place ? I don't exactly remember the date, but I
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Was notice
remember the circumstance very well.
given of the holding of that meeting? Yes
The JUDGE :-Was it with reference to the
Did you assist in giving notice of it ? I did.
strike ? Witness :- The meeting at Burnley was
And then you went on to Colne the next day ?
not with reference to the strike.
Yes, along with a few friends. How many were
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I want to
there with you ? Five. We hired a car, and
knowthe thime. Do you remember any event
that happened in the month of August ?-Do you went in it. Are you a delegate of any kind ?
remember any procession going to Manchester? am no delegate. Then you had no public busiNo, except on ordinary business. Did you hear ness to go there? Had you? Witness :-What
of the strike and a procession going there ? O, I to Colne ? Yes? No, no further than the interest
1 S
I heard tell of those things. I took in it. Are these the only meetings you atheard of that.
How long before that was the meeting ?-I don't tended? Yes. Did you attend any meetings in Aumind the exact time-was it before or after the gust? Where? At Marsden. It lies beween Burnstrike? O, it was before. Where was the meet- ley and Colne. When was that meeting helding at Burnley held ? There were two meetings.
during the strike, I suppose, and the object of it
How many people were there? One of them was
was to quiet things ? The object of it was to
out of doors. There might be 15000 or 20000
persons at it. There was also a meeting in a quiet things, and they did all they possibly
tent erected for the purpose. Was it on Mon- could to quiet things. Where you at a meeting
.

day ? It was. Was it in the month of August or
July ? I rather think it would be in the latter
end of June. How far is Burnley from Manchester? Twenty-four miles. In what direction?
-Is it in the direction towards Yorkshire or
Liverpool ? Towards Liverpool. Is not Colne a
little beyond Burnley ? Yes, about six miles.
And is not Burnley north of Manchester? Yes.
Did people come to Burnley from all parts round
during the strike ? No. To this meeting? O,
there came people from the neighbourhood, but

1

.

Z

_

T

-

at Pendle-hill at any time ?
es. Now, are
these three meetings the only meetings you ever
attended?
During my life? No, no, during this time? Yes. You were not at any
meetings at Blackburn, or any of those other
places where meetings were held? No.
Sir THOMAS POTTER examined by Mr
O'CONNOR: - Sir Thomas, you are a magistrate,
residing in Manchester? I reside at Buile-hill,
%iles from Manchester ? Do you remen-

1three

314
ber the excitement that took place in Manchester
in August last ? Yes. :You were mayor last year,
Sir Thomas ? No; I was mayor during the two
years 1839-40 and 1840-41. Sir Thomas, what
was the general character of that excitement;
which I would rather that you would describe
to his Lordship, than put you to the trouble of
paswering questions ?- What was the deport.
ae4rt of the people, the cause of it, in your opinion; the general character? I conceive the gexeral character of it, in the first instance, was
a strike for higher wages. The people, when they
eame from Ashton and assembled in Manchester,
commenced by turning out the mills; the hands
themselves seemed quite willing; in most cases
there was no force used; at leaA don't recollect hearing of any. About wI time, Sir
Thomas, did the angry excitement begin to terpaipate ? Upon my word, I don't know. Oh,
about ? I think they-did not return to work
generally for a month. Not generally to work
for a month, because it was a strike for wages.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-No; he did
not say that.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Are you aware, Sir Thomas, that a procession was to take place in
Manchester on the 16th of August last? Yes.
Are you aware of the reasons why that procession was abandoned? Yes, I believe I am.
Then will you state them ? I believe the magisstrates informed some of the parties, I rather
inik Scholefield, that'the procession would
Mr.
not be allowed; and he at once stated, that he
would do every thing in his power to put a stop
to it, as I understood. I was at the Town-hall,
but I was not one of the magistrates to whom he

applied.
The JUDGE :-Then you don't know anything about it.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now, during that time,
during the strike, what was the deportment of
the people generally? I consider it was very
peaceable. Now, Sir Thomas, I believe you
knQw the disposition and character of your
townsmen and neighbours well?
Yes, I
think I do. Do you remember processions
taking place on the 16th of August previously? Yes, I have heard of them. Now, do
you, in your own recollection, remember a more
quiet 16th of August than the last? Certainly not.
I believe you met withl- an accident about that
time, or a little before, from your gig ? I think
some time before; in June. Can you recipect,

shortly after that, Pilg and another waiting oA
you.
The JUDGE :-You met with an accident in
June? Witness :-Yes, coming from Buile Hill
to Manchester. I met with that accident I think
about six weeks before the strike.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-After that do you recollect two men calling on you? Witness :-I recollect two operatives waiting on me; but I do not
recollect their names. But about the period of
the strike, do you recollect those two men calling upon you ? Yes. Do you recollect the object of their visit? Yes. What was it? They
stated to me, that several manufacturers were
paying very low wages, much lower than others,
and they were exceedingly anxious for an explanation. Well, now; did they ask for your services in any way ? Yes, they did. In what way
did they wish you to interfere? They wished me
to try to procure a meeting. Between themselves
and their masters ? Yes, between them and their
masters. I think, Sir Thomas, you stated, that
you were actively engaged at the Town Hall, in
the discharge of your duties as a magistrate?
Yes, I did.
The JUDGE :-During the period of the turn.
out? Yes, my Lord; for six or seven weeks, the
magistrates were there entirely.
Mr O'CONNOR :-Do you recollect a policeman named Hindley making any report to the
magistrates on the 16th or 17th of August?
[The Judge read his notes, which showed that
Robert Bell was the policeman referred to.]
Mr. O'CONNOR :-That was the man. Witness :-Yes. I recollect a man coming to the police office, and giving information to the effect
his lordship has stated.-Did you think it necessary to take any precautions? No, I don't know
that I did.
The JUDGE :-Made a report to what effect?
That Mr. O'Connor had arrived that morning.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Now, Sir Thomas, what
impression did the conduct of the people leave
upon the authorities; the people I mean on
strike? Why, the impression was, I think, that
thepeople were peaceably inclined; but they had
proceeded to acts of violence in turning out mills,
and prevented some individuals from working
who were disposed to work.-From your authority and long knowledge of Manchester, can
you speak as to the condition of the working
classes at that period ? Yes, I think I can give
some account of it. I think that they were in
a very deplorable condition, in consequence o

815
,

high price of provisions, andalow rate of four weeks. Where ws the ommander-in
Well, taking their deplorable condition, chief of the district at the time? He was at
in consequence of the high price of provisions, the York Hotel, close by the Town Hall. Where
and the low rate of wages, into consideration, the magistrates were in attendance ? Yes. Did
,whether do you think their conduct was praise- the special constables attend at the Town Hall?
worthy or otherwise ? Was it, or was it not, the Yes. Day and night?
I don't know whether
-admiration of the authorities ?
they were all night, though I think they were.
The JUDGE:-I really don't like to interpose Was there not a relay of themn relieving each
in this matter, but really I think it is not right other, so that there should be a party in constant
to ask the question.
attendance day and night ? I believe there was.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Very well, I shall not For how long ? For at least a month. Did you
press the matter further, my Lord.
see anything of what occurred in Manchester on
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENE- Tuesday the 9th, and Wednesday the 10th of
RAL:-You are one of the magistrates? Yes, a August ? On Tuesday the 9th, I was at my
borough magistrate as well as a county magis
borough magistrate as well as a county-magis warehouse the whole of the day, but I heard of
hins
d
trate. I think we have already got it that the these things.-I don't want to know, Sir Thomas,
magistrates issued a proclamation ? Yes. A sort what you heard, I want to know whether you
of joint proclamation ? Yes, we issued a procla- saw any thing of the state of Manchester, the
mation in conjunction. What number of special publicstreets, the shops, and warehouses, during
constables were sworn in in Manchester? I don't those two days? I saw nothing particular on
just recollect. You can give me some notion of
the number-how many scores or hundreds ? a great deal of excitement. Were not all the
'At what period do you mean ? At any time af- shops shut ? I don't think many of the shops
ter the 7th or 8th of August, down to the 16th were shut on the Wednesday. Then were they
Tuesday or the Thursday? No, certainly
the
or 17th. I don't know that I can speak with on
any degree of certainty, but I should think about not, on the Tuesday.
The JUDGE :-I thought you said you were
500. Do you know how many troops were in
in the warehouse all the Tuesday? So I was,
1Manchester? We had, during the first week,
abont 500; but a deputation of the magistrates my Lord.
waited upon the Secretary for the Home DeThe JUDGE :-Then you don't know? Witpartment, and we had a considerable reinforce- ness :-I b
ment. How many? I cannot say. When did I don't know of my own knowledge.
I don't
wn knowledge.
you apply for more? The deputation went off
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I want to
on
know whether you were present at any of G.
on the Saturday. What Saturday??
Saturday. hat Saturday
The JUDGE :-The 13th ? Witness ;-No, violence, or at the stoppage of any of the mills ?
my, Lord-I think it was Saturday-waitNo, I was not; I was the oldest magistrate,
Tuesday was the 9th. Yes, I think it was Sa- and they kept me principally at the Town Hall,
turday the 13th.
with the exception that I once went at the head of
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
:-How many the troops to the railroad. What was that for?
moTheATTdid
you
:-How many We heard that they were attempting to destroy the
more did you get ? I really cannot tell, ex-NERAL A troop of cavalry was called out, and
get? I really cannot tell, ex- railroad.
Actly; we had a detachment of the guards, I wentwith them; but another magistrate soon
and some cavalry ; perhaps about 1500, came and relieved me. I suppose you went
for the
but I cannot speak with accuracy. I want purpose of authorising the firing of the troops,
if
no particular accuracy. Was it beyond 1500 necessary ? Yes. What time did that happen?
altogether ? I think so. Did you your- I don't know; but I think it must have been a
self personally attend as a magistrate at the week after. Do you remember the day of the
Town Hall ? Oh, yes. Are you able to tell weels I don't. It could not be Tuesday the9th
me whether the magistrates attended day and or Wednesday? Oh, no; it was not that week,
night. Yes; I can tell you, that they attended day but the following. And did you go with the
and night? For how long ? Oh, I think it was troops? Yes. How many? There was a troop
three or four weeks. Two or three magistrates no recollection, SirThomas? Don't understand
were lodged at the adjacent hotel-indeed, next me, that, in putting the question, I have any
door-in readiness to be called up at any hour. other feeling than the greatest respect; you canHow many weeks ? I think it would be full not imagine that I have any other feeling?

ages.

316
Oh, certainly not. But you cannot tell what day
you went with the forty troopers to protect the
railway ? I really cannot; it was some time the
following week. Who had the command of the
troops in Manchester ? Do you mean when the
reinforcements came? Yes. Sir Thomas Arbuthnot and Sir William Warre, Now, I want
to know, whether you were present at any meeting of the magistrates when any persons came to
demand or to request assistance ? Yes; I believe
I was. Were you present at any time when the
magistrates advised them to stop their works for
the present, and not to make any resistance, or
anything of that sort ? Yes; I think there was a
general advice of that sort given. There was a
general advice given not to resist? Yes. Why
was that advice given, sir ?
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I have no objection, my
Lord, to the fullest developement of the case;
but is this evidence ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: - Then I
will ask it. I will put it plump to him. Was
not the state of the town such that you did not
dare to advise the parties to resist ?-Were you
not afraid of bloodshed and tumult ? Witness :Itidividually, I was never afraid. I don't impute
to you personal fear, sir; but I ask you, whether
the town was not in that state that the magis-

effectually resisted, was not the advice by the
magistrates to give up resistance? Not in my
hearing; certainty not.
Do you remember
Messrs. Stirling and Beckton making an application ? I was not present wheh they made any,
though I believe they did make one.
M. O'CONNOR:-That will do, Sir Thomas.
ALDERMAN GEORGE BOYLE CHAPPELL, examined by Mr. O'CONNOR :-I believe, Mr. Chappell, you are one of the oldest
manufacturers in Manchester?
The JUDGE :-You are an Alderman of Manchester? Witness :-Yes. [To Mr. O'Connor.]
I have been for more than fifty years an inhabitant of Manchester, though not the place of my
nativity. Do you remember, about the time of
the turn-outs, your mill being stopped? Yes. What
were the circumstances attending it when your
hands turned-out? Witness .- My Lord, is verbal communication from me, as a principal, evidence; because I was not at the mill when the
hands turned-out ?
The JUDGE :-But you know your mill was
stopped, because you went there and found it
stopped; that is all you know of your own knowledge ? Witness :-Yes.
Mr. O'CONNOR : - Now, Mr. Alderman
Chappell, havingunderstood that your workswere

trates advised them to yield to the mob, in order
to prevent tumult and confusion ? Why, the fact
is, they had no difficulty; for the parties seemed
quite.ready to be turned out, or to-turn-out.
There was no force necessary, that is very well
4known. Come, Sir Thomas, that is no answer to
my question.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I dare say it is not the
., ae you wanted.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:--You were
selling me you were present when the people came
for assistance, and they were advised not to resist.
.I ask you, why was that advice given? I cannot say why. I recollect a young man came,
asking advice whether he should fire upon the
mob. He said he had cannon, and could destroy
so many; and I know we advised him to do no
such thing. Did not you or the magistrates re.commend the persons not to resist the attempts
of the mob ? I don't remember any particular
recommendation; but I know it was our opinion,
that it was better not to resist. And was it not
to prevent bloodshed? I think not. I don'tthink
that the magistrates were at all under the influence
of fear. Then will you tell me, why you recommended them not to resist? I believe, in some
cases, as at Mr. Birley's mill, they did resist effectually. Was that any reason why you should
recommend them not to resist? I don't know
whether we did recommend them not to resist.
Why, sir, I ask you whether, at every mill that

stopped,was there anydamage done to your works?
Not a vestige. Was there any glass broke? Not
a vestige. I understood, from the information
given to me, that they did not want to do any
injury to person or property, but demanded that
the hands should leave; and I think that the
hands were quite as willing to leave as the men
who made the application desired that they should.
Now, after having been connected as an alderman,
and an authority, and a good master, with these
people for 50 years, what was your impression of
the whole character of these disturbances ? There
are two Aldermen belonging to the township of
Charlton-upon-Medlock.
The JUDGE :-We will ask about them afterwards, answer the question. Witness ?-I want
to make an explanation, to put myself in the
right place.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-His Lordship will put
you in the right place. Reply to the question.
I conceive myself, from what I saw in the proceedings in which I was engaged personally, that
the strike was for wages. Well, and what was the
conduct of the people under the circumstancestheir general conduct and behaviour ? I must
confess, after being in every mob for the last
fifty years in Manchester, I thought a better behaved and well disposed mobility I never saw
before-[Some manifestation of applause in the
Court.]
The JUDGE :-If there is any more noise I

317
must have that place cleared. I give that notice
Mr. O'CONNOR (to the witness) :-On their
behalf I thank you, I am sure. Now, Mr. Alderman Chappell, from your knowledge of trade
for fifty years, and of the condition of the work.
ing classes, I ask what was their condition at the
period of which you are now speaking? What
was their condition generally ? There had been a
general reduction from 1826 up to the present
week. I took an account from 1826 of the price
of food and the price of cotton, year by year,
and it brought me to the conclusion, that, at the
present moment, goods are just at one half the
price they were then, and cotton is only about
15 per cent less than Was at that period.
The JUDGE:-A general reduction of wages
from 1826 ? Witness :-My Lord, I said goods,
not wages.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-He says, the reduction in
the raw material was only 15 per cent, as compared with the prices in 1826, while the reduction in the manufactured article was one half.
Witness :-Yes. The price in 1826 was two
sAillings and two-pence; yesterday, the same articles were one shilling and three half-pence.
Then, Mr. Alderman Chappell, in consequence
of the depression in trade, the falling-off in profits of masters, was it impossible for the masters
to give the wages to the working men ? Certainly. Then, was there a corresponding reduction in wages ? Wages must unquestionably have
been reduced; but still I think the depression
arose more from the unemployed living upon the
employed, than from any deficiency in wages.
Then, am I to understand, that, in consequence
of the small profits- Witness :-There have
been no profits at all, for three years. Then, a
vast number of operatives were turned out upon
the wide world ? Oh, unquestionably; hundreds
of thousands. Mr. Alderman Chappell, can you
speak, of your own knowledge, from the necessity imposed upon you of inquiring into the state
of your own working men, generally speaking,
was the destitution great amongst the operative
classes ? Unquestionably, they had not a sufficiency, such as every Englishman would like to
see his neighbour enjoy. Did you go as one of a
deputation to Sir Robert Peel, to inform him of
the state of your part of the country ? I must say,
that I am no member of the League, and never
was. I never subscribed sixpence to any political institution in my life. I was requested by
the manufacturers to be one of a deputation to
represent the situation of the manufacturers and
workpeople at that moment. ' thought it a duty
I owed to the town, having been so long in it,
and I went with them. Did you represent to

country, in consequence of the situation of the
working classes?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I should
be very sorry to interrupt, but really I must object to that.

Mr. O'CONNOR:-I ask the Attorney-General whether he will shut out this evidence ?
The JUDGE :-Then, I think, Mr. O'Connor, that I shall be obliged to shut it out.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Really,my
Lord, it is impossible not to know that there
was great distress. It is abundantly proved in
the evidence already.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Very well, then, I shall
not ask the question.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :- have no
question to ask you, sir.

JAMES KERSHAW, Esq. examined by Mr.
O'CONNOR.
The JUDGE :-You are mayor of Manchester

now ? Yes, my Lord.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Mr. Kershaw, you were
a magistrate in August last, I believe ? I was.
Have you resided long in Manchester? All my
life. You have great interest in the preservation
of the peace? I have. Can you speak, from
your own knowledge, of the transactions which
usually take place on the 16th of August, in
Manchester ? There has been usually a procession in Manchester on the 16th. Do you recollect the 16th of August in previous years ?
Not very distinctly. Do you recollect the last
16th of August ? I do. Do you recollect about
the time the magistrates issued a proclamation?
I do. About what time was it, Mr. Mayor"
I think on the Sunday before the 16th of August. Do you recollect the Queen's proclamation succeeding it on the following day ? I do;
I believe it was on the following day. In consequence of the state of Manchester, and the
knowledge of the magistrates that a procession
was to take place upon the 16th, did the magistrates make any application to the active
parties relating to that procession? I belieyve
they did. In what spirit was that application
met by the parties they made it to ? I believe it
was immediately said, that the procession should
not take place. I believe, Mr. Mayor, you are
a manufacturer, employing a number of hands ?
I am a calico printer. Were your works stopped?
About what time ? I think on
They were.
Thursday, the 11th of August. Tuesday was
the 9th, on which the procession took place.Was there any damage done to your works?
None. Did the hands in your employment reSir Robert Peel, that there was danger in the quire any very great force to induce them to

818
epase labour ? I believe my partner, who was atI 23rd of August? Mr. O'Connor. Did I receive,
the works, when he found the parties coming' or would I accept, of any remuneration for my
Ap to insist upon them to desist from labour, services as editor ? Not a penny. Do you recol.
.advised the bands to go out. Did your hands lect a notice being advertized
in the newspaper
go out willingly ? I believe they did. And no to the effect that my letters should be addressed
,damage whatever done ? No. From your know- to the Evening Star office in the Strand.
ledge of the previous 16th of August and the
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-What are
-last 16th of August, what was the general state you going to show ?
of the town, making allowances for the number
Mr. O'CONNOR:-That all my letters, priof idle people in consequence of the turn-out ?- vate and public, were opened at the Evening
'What was the general state of Manchester on Star office.
the 16th of August last? It passed off much
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Isthatevimore peaceably than was anticipated, and com- dence ?
paratively peaceable as having reference to other
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, I am charged
.days. Do you mean on the 13th, 14th, and with a conspiracy from
1stof August to the
15th. Yes. Then, Mr. Kershaw, as a ma
is- st of September, and
f evidence be shut out
trate, believe tr.hat you and theas a magis- to show that all my letters were addressed indis,trate, I believe that you and the magistrates criminately to the Evening
I
Star office ?
generally, did consider that the 9th, 10th, 1lth,
The JUDGE :-I think that evidence to show
12th, and so on, were the most disturbed days that there was no disposition on his part to conI think they were. The greatest excitement ? ceal anything.
,Yes, in point of turning out the mills. Now ca
Mr.
CNN
Now Mr. Pray, on your
you speak from your own knowledge of business oath, was it not your custom, as proprietor, to
as to the state of the working classes at that open all letters addressed
to the editor ? It wfa
period ? They were exceedingly distressed, no not the custom
for me, but for the sub-editor;
doubt. And, considering their distress, was their but I have opened hundreds
of letters marked
conduct good or bad ? I think, speaking of them private. Now, sir, what was mygeneral
instrucgenerally and as a whole, as to the body of the tions with regard to the matter that should apcommunity, I think their conduct was good. pear in the Evening Star relative to the state of
There were exceptions. Of course.
the country? That we should keep everything as
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I have no- quiet as possible, and that we should by no means
thing to ask you, sir. Oh, yes; where were admit any matter in favour of the strike, or of
works? At
the excitement. The strike and the excitement
your works? At Ardwick, near Manchester. were synonymous. Did you understand from th9
How many miles off? Oh, about a mile from general tenour of my conversation with
you, that
ne Exchange. How many persons came when I was anxious, or otherwise, to preserve, as far as
they requested your works should be stopped ? I lay in my power, the peace of the country? I
was not there. But you stated that your partner always thought it was Mr. O'Connor's desire to
advised your hands to go away ? I believe he told make the country as peaceable as possible, and I
me there was no large number; eighty or one always thought him sincere in it. Who was the
hundred, but of that I am not sure.
correspondent of the Evening Star then ?
SirRALPH PENDLEBURY:-Was next call- Griffin. Did you give him orders to receive
ed, and not appearing, Mr. O'Connor said, that he payment in Manchester? I did. Upon whom?
understood was ill, and had sent a Upon James Leach, who was one of our agents
Sir Ralph
nderstood Sir ill, and adent a at Manchester.
alph was
He received weekly salary
medical certificate that he was not well enough from him by my orders. Now, ain
consequence
to attend,
of my orders to you, did you exclude some of his
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I shall call no more matter from your paper? Yes, I considered some
witnesses, my Lord, to prove the state of Man- of his matter so inflammatory, that I cut out much
chester.
of it, and sometimes I excluded it altogether. Ina
ISAAC CLARKE PRAY examined by Mr. fact I considered that he wished to entrap me,
O'CONNOR:-Mr. Pray, were you, in August as proprietor of the paper. Do you recollect
last, the registered proprietor of the Evening having opened a letter written to me from GrifStar newspaper? Yes. Do you recollect about fin, requesting money from me to send him to
the latter end of August, the suppression of pub- America to preven is giving information against
lie meetings in London, and throughout the Coun- me? Yes.
try ? Yes.
About that period, who was the
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :---I object to
slitor of the Evening Starnewspaper-about
the that.

mooted in the Chartist
Mrs O'CONNOR:-He cannot Atop him now,. physical force was :first
ranks, my having any conversation with you,
-myLord.
The JUDGE :-He objected, although you and to what effect ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Mr. O'Con.
did not hear him.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENE- nor has a perfect right to get from any witness
RAL :-Is the Evening Star a daily paper? Yes, the general impression of his character, but not
a London daily paper. What day did it begin ? to refer to particular occasions.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-From your knowledge of
I think it was about the 16th_ of July. Mr.
O'Connor did not live at your office ? No. me for eight years do you think I would do any
Where did he live? I don't know where he think calculated to lead to a breach of the peace,
Am I an avaricilived. I presume he had a private residence in through any pecuniary motive ?
he had. You cannot tell ous man, a covetous man, or a generous man?
JLondon-? I presume
addresses of Mr,
whether all his letters came to the Evening Witness :-My Lord, in thewhat I imagined to
Star? I cannot tell. He lived in London; O'Connor, I always observed
he always came to the office and: stayed there be generosity, sincerity, great zeal, and very con.
during business hours. I don't want to know siderable physical energy; without, of course,
where he lived, or to intrude upon his privacy, any reference to a breach of the peace; and
always heard him
but do you know whether he lived in London, certainly, I must say, I
deprecate every thing tending to a breach of the
or in the neighbourhood ? I presume he did.
On several occasions I have heard him
Mr. O'CONNOR:--My Lord, I wish you to peace.
ask the witness whether the Evening Star was giving addresses connected with electioneering
?lot a paper that depended principally upon the contests.
- GENERAL :-you speak
The
districts,
in the :
Vaerative classes,Witness manufacturingpaper de- yourself ATTORNEYdon't you ? Yes, sometimes.
sometimes,
u-Yes,
the
a
r support?
S "u r YtTITUS
Wie
e
O
pended chiefly on the operative classes and was
circulated extensively in Lancashire and the O tONNOR:-Where do you live, Mr. Brooke
I live at Dewsbury. How long have you known
neighbouring district.
me as a public man ? For ten years; personally
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, there are several for sixor seven, Ihave known you, during very
other authorities from Manchester, whom I re- excited ti
lease from their attendance here; having gone been, frequently, in a state of great excitement?
Yes.
sufficiently into that evidence.
The JUDGE :-What is your neighbourhood?
examined by Mr.
JAMES HALLIDAY,
O'CONNOR :-I believe you are a manufac- Dewsbury.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Have you heard severa
turer residing in Oldham? A spinner, sir. A
cotton spinner? Yes. How long have you addresses from me? Yes. What was the imknown me ? Since the contested election in pression which they were calculated to leave on
1835. Now, Halliday, have you, on various the minds of the people ? I have often heard you
occasions, and at different times, attended meet- exhort them to peace, and it is the impression of
ings "here I addressed the assembly? Yes. the neighbourhood that you always exhorted
I believe, like others, you attended from cu- them to peace: Have they been led to believe
riosity? Not exactly so. Not exactly; now that my speeches had the effect of promoting
Halliday, upon your oath, what has been the peace ?
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:-I object to
genepl tendency pf my addresses to the working ~isses ? Of course my answer will depend that.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Have you ever heard one
upon the occasions. Upon every occasion did I
iot enforce the necessity of preserving the sentence escape my lips calculated to lead to a
peace ? I never heard anything in any of your breach of the peace? No. Do you think I use
addresses calculated to lead to a breach of the the terms "Peace, law, and orderThe ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I object to
peace. Have you, on various occasions, heard
me complain that my motives and views were this evidence; it is open to Mr. O'Connor to
grossly misrepresented, and at, in consequence give testimony as to his character.
S. BROOKE Jun., examined by Mr.

of misrepresentation,

great prejudices

were

Mr. O'CONNOR:-Very well, Mr. Brooke,

created against me ? Yes, I have. Do you what is my general character ? Among the workrecolle t, at the time when the queation of ing classes you are greatly admired.

320

The JUDGE :- As a peaceable man ? Witness :--Yes, my Lord. The middle classes don't
admire him.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-No; that shows their
taste.
The JUDGE :-What is your opinion of his
general character ? Witness :-That he is a

Mr. O'CONNOR :--My Lord, I W s imd ia
ing this witness to meet what I thought ani
-=
tion made by the Attorney-General, respecting
my motives. I was astonished at it because I
knew it to be so much at variance with my whole
character. That was the reason I examined the
witness in the way I did.

peaceable man.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-IIave you ever heard me
complain ?
The ATTORNEY-G ENERAL : -I object to
these complaints; they are not evidence.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-What are you? A druggist?
JOHN FARR, examined by Mr. O'CONNOR;
--Where do you live ? In Port Robert, county
of Cork. You are my steward there? Yes.
Hbw long have you lived in my family ? Thirty
years. You lived with my father. Yes. With
my brother? Yes. Did my brother leave you
anything for your good conduct? Yes, 101. a
year. You have been my steward since ? Yes.
I believe I have been in the habit of standing
in the fields with my workmen, sometimes from
100 to 130, for nine or ten hours a day, for
years ? Yes. Now, from your knowledge of me,
do you think I am a violent, or peaceable man ?
I always knew you to be for peace. Do you remember the time of the outbreak in Cork ? Yes.
Do you remember the resistance offered to the
magistrates and military there ? Yes. Do you
recollect my interference, and the people giving
up their arms to me, and my piling them in my
sp: ants' hall ? I do, sir. What was my conduct
to my labourers, and the poor in general ? You
built houses for your labourers and gave them
free, and ground with them. Did I knock down
mud cabins, and build stone houses for them ?
Yes. I charged no rent ? No. Did you pay the
wages every Saturday night ? Yes; and you
raised the wages when the times got hard.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-My Lord, I am shewing
what my character is; it is of importance to me
that there should be no mistake on that point.
The Attorney-General said I might be deriving
some benefit from the Northern Etar. Now, I
am showing my character through life, which is
of great importance to me, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I deny that
at once. I imputed no such personal motives to
Mr. O'Connor.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Well, that will do. [To
witness.] Did you ever know me to stop a single
day's wages from a sick man, whether he was
working or not? No, you paid him regularly the
same as the man that was working.

The JUDGE :-I never understood the Attorney-General to impute any such motives to
you.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-I am happy to hear it,
my Lord.
SAMUEL CHAMBERS examined byJAMES
LEACH :-Do you live in Manchester? Yes.
Do you recollect being at my house on the 17th
of August ? I do. What time of the day was it ?
I was there about nine o'clock in the morning.
Do you recollect seeing me at home at that time ?
I do. I saw you go out. What time did you
see me leave home ? It might be half-past ten
o'clock. From that to eleven were you at my
house ? Yes. Were you frequently at my house
during the 17th of August ? Yes. At different
times ? Yes. I don't think I was an hour from
there during the whole of the day, from half-paGP
nine o'clock in the morning. Did I employ you
to make some repairs in my shop, and to make a
large board for a placard ? Yes. Do you recollect
seeing a placard on that board on the 17th? Yes.
Would you know the placard if you were to see
it? Yes. Is that the placard? [Handing the witness the Executive Placard.] Yes. At what time
was it when you first saw it on the board ? About
eleven o'clock. Was that after I left home ?
Yes.
The JUDGE:-After he left home? Witness:-Yes, my Lord; about an hour or two
after he left. He went out at half-past ten or
eleven, and I saw it after I came in.
The JUDGE :-It was not put on the board
till after he went out ? No, my Lord.
PAUL FAIRCLOUGH examined by JAMES
LEACH:-You live in Manchester? Yes.
The JUDGE:-What are you? A fruiterer
and potatoe dealer.
JAMES LEACH:-Do you live in Manchester Yes sir. Do you frequently come to my
?
house ? I do. Were you there on the 17th of
August last? I was. At what time? Between
eleven and twelve o'clock in the forenoon. Do
you recollect seeing a person come and paste a
large placard on a board, at my door ? I do.
Would you know that placard now if youwere to
see it ? I think I slluld. Just look at that placard ? [Exhibiting the executive placard] Yes,
that is it. I should know it more by the appearance than by anything else. That is the manner

321
i was headed.

What time was that put up ? drafts frequently, and latterly to stop them alto-

About eleven o'clock.
The JUDGE :-Then Leach was not there at
that time ? No, sir.
JAMES LEACH :-Was he a bill-poster who
put it up? Yes. Was I at home at that time?
The JUDGE: He says you were not.
LEACH:-Did you see me at home any portion of that day ? No part of that day.
Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Did the man who posted the placard go
inside the house ? No sir, he merely put the
placard on the board and went away. He did
not go into the shop at all ? o, sir.
JOHN ARDELL, examined by Mr. O'CONNOR:-I believe you are my clerk, and have
been so from the first day the Northern Star
was established? Yes. Do you recollect, ashort
time previously to the 16th of August last year,
any wood-cut being sent to the Northern Star ?
Yes, I recollect a wood-cut being sent by Griffin,
as secretary to the Hunt's monument committee.
Do you recollect him saying that if you would
admit it, the committee would pay for it? I cannot recollect that. Do you remember another
wood-cyt which appeared in the Star, being paid
for in the beginning of June ? I remember a
wood-cut was paid for somewhere about that
time, but I cannot recollect the exact date. I
have the date in my book. Where is your book ?
I have it here; [witness produces the book and
reads] "July 22nd, paid for a sketch of the
It was
Manchester massacre, five shillings."
furnished a fortnight before, and he, (Griffin,)
paid for it on the 22nd of July. Are you aware
that wood-cuts to represent the flogging of soldiers, &c. are frequently given in newspapers ?
Yes. Are you aware that that wood-cut was
taken from one that was used before? Yes,' I
have the original here, from which it was engraved. Have you ever had any conimunication
with me relative to the impossibility of meeting
my drafts upon you for the support of poor people ? Yes, several times. You received a general account from Heywood, Cleave and other
large agents ?-And don't you know that I have
paid, for Chartist purposes, upwards of twenty
pounds a week ? Yes, I have received such accounts : I know we have large sums to pay Mr.
weeks. Do you
Heywood, running on fQor
not know that, on some occasions, I have
expense in relieving the families
incurred tbai
of poor people who were incarcerated? Yes:
And sometimes the prisofrs themselves?
Yes. Now, have you not written to me sometimes saying that, inconsequence of 'such liberality, you were obliged to dishonour my drafts.?
Yes; I have been obliged to dishonour your

gether, as we could not pay for stamps else.
During the time you were in York Castle, you
did not receive, but paid, money to the Northern
Star. Have not distressed operatives wishing
to start in business called on me, and did I
not frequently give them a sovereign or two at a
time? Yes. Did you ever know, during the
last five years, a man coming to me for money,
that my hand was not in my pocket to give it to
him ? I never knew a man to call for some, without your giving it, or ordering me to give him
some. Have you attended many meetings where
I have been ? Veryseldom. You did not take
any part in politics, I suppose ? Very little.
What is my general character? I should think it
very far from anything inconsistent with peace.
Did you ever hear me denounced and complained
of by many parties, for stopping what might
have led to a disturbance or breach of the peace ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I againobject, my Lord.
The JUDGE :-I think we may hear this.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-Have I the character of
stopping disturbances ?Witness :-Yes. Do we
pay large wages ? Yes, we pay as large wages as
any other printer of newspapers. Did I ever
stop the wages of a sick man ? No. Have'you
not known some to be sick for years, ard receiving their wages the same as these at work?
Yes.
Mr. ATHERTON.-My Lord, to completethe evidence, there is a part of the Northern
Star of the 20th of August, which I relied upon,
and it was not read.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL :-Here is
the paper, my Lord, [Handing the Star up to
the Judge] in which the paragraph is. He
may read the paragraph, or it may be entered as
read.
Mr. ATHERTON:-Let it be entered as'
read.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-Then I
must call your Lordship's attention to some
other paragraphs in the same paper.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-Well, you may consider
them as read.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-Very well,
it will save the time of the Court.
The following quotation from an article which.
appeared in the Northern Star of the 20th of
August, was then put in by Mr. Atherton:Our opinioni on the means now used for its
attainmentby the trades' of Manchester was registered three years ago. That opinion has undergone no change. A cessation from labour, to
be effectual to the carrying of any political object,
must be national and simultaneous: it cannot
then fail to be successful, because it indicates the

nation's will, against which, in its full strength, start their mills, with th excetion of Medcalf,
whether positively, or thus negatively manif~ted, no power can stand; but a mere seetional. display of this most decisive of all the
forms of moral force, like a mere sectional display of physical resistance, is sure to be overpowered by the strength of faction, consisting in
its immense wealth and its organized physical resources.

the manager for the estate of Dobson. A public
I meeting took place last night, ad a re b tiod
was passed to have the Charter the la ofthe
land before they worked again.
BINGLEY
Several thousands eft Bradford early onTuesday morning, and iroceded twards Shipiey,
where they stopped allthemillswithout difficulty,

" If then the strike is to be a Chartist strike, there being no protective:forced, From thence
there being no protective force. From thence
it must become universal: not merely Manchester, but every town in England, Wales, and
Scotland, must at once-as one man and with one
voice-declare the purpose of the people to be
free; and such a declaration will be, to those
whom it concerns, the fiat of omnipotence. But
if Manchester, or even Lancashire, sustain the
struggle singly, it will be unsuccessful, and, in all
probability, retard the movement it was meant
to hasten. Let the country see to this; the men
of Lancashire have done nobly; let their brethren throughout the empire arouse; let them
speak out at once, like men, and say, 'Yes' or
'No,' to the great question of 'sball we now
strike for the Charter ?' No higgling- no hesitation-no waiting :'If, when done, 'twere well done,
Then, 'twere Well it were done quickly.'
" Never, however, for one moment let it be
forgotten by any Chartist, that to be successful

they marched on to Bingley, where they com-

menced their work of putting a stop to all busi.
ness. While the Skipton mail was passing
through, all persons got on that could find room
and rode on to Keighley.
WEDNESDAY.
Everything is quite at a stand still, and nofamilies
is are seen
thingwhoto be paradingtth streets. of the turnthe
outs
STAFFORD.

WEDNESDAY

NIGHT.

How matters will terminate it is impossible for
one to tell. This part of the country is in an
awful state of excitement. On Monday last, all
the shops in this town were shut up, and great
excitement prevailed in consequence of a report
that the collieas " were coming." Three hundred additional specials were immediately sworn
ini. The 12th foot were removed from this town
this morning for the Isle of France, and were
replaced by two troops of the 34th. If matters

they must be peaceful. They have a right to
strike, but they have no right to riot. They have
a right to work or not to work, but they have no
right to break windows, destroy property, or
burn factories.

do not assume a different aspect soon, the whole
of the Stafford trade will be at a stand-still, as
it depends entirely on the Pottery and the
northern districts, indeed many of the manufac.
turers are already talking of stopping their

Above all things, they have no right to insult,
annoy, or fight with the police force or the soldiery. Every hellish invention will be practised
to induce them to do this; let the bridle be kept
tightly on their tempers and even on their
tongues: let them even patiently bear annoyance,
insult, and indignity; resenting them only by the
calmness of a manly contempt, the offspring of
a lofty purpose not be turned aside.

shops."
"SKIPTON.
" Several thousands visited this quiet town on
Tuesday, from Colne and other parts, and stopped
the mills. The town remained quiet on Wednesday. On Tuesday, the special constables captured, with the assistanceof a few of the military,
six of the turn-outs, who were committed to
York. Mr. Garforth, one of the magistrates,

was, we understand, much injured."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL put in the folt" KEIGHLEY.
lowing paragraphs which appeared in the Nor.
" Great e6citement prevailed here on Monday.
of
teri n'Stiar the same date:Several thousand tti's, outs poured into the town
AGUCHORLEY. between ten and eleven oA k, and proceeded
7
c
Chorley, esterday, to stop all the mnills. Every pre&Zu1tio0n was
80
About 0 people entered
about eleven o'clock in the forenoon, principally taken by the magistrates, who issued a prodi5'
colliers by trade, and succeeded in stopping all mation requestin#all peaceable inhabitants to
the works in less than two hours. A great num- keep within, doors, and swore in upwards of 400
ber have gone to Preston this morning. All the constables, but r whose services there were
are at a stand to-day; none have dared to-nt much occasion, not being backed by aiy

military,- who were all engaged intheneighbour.
ing large towns."
"POTTERIES.
6
SHELTON AND HANLEY.
TUESDAY, TWELVE O'CLOCI.

" I have just heard that the military stationed
at Burslem have begun firing on the people, and
that two men have been killed, one from Stokeupon-Trent, and the other from either Macclesfield or Congleton; but reports are so rife at
the present hour, that the extent of the loss of
life canriottold. I also hear that numbers are
be
wounded, but how great a number I cannot say,
thus proving that the ruling few are determined,
at all hazards, to perpetuate their rule over the
sons of labour. Where these things will end I
cannot say, but this I do say, that neither life
nor property is now safe in these districts. I
would just make one remark before I close this,
that, as a body, the Chartists have had no hand
in the destruction of property that has been
going on here, nor has the advice of the Chartist speakers been attended to, for, had that
been the case, I can affirm that no such thing
as loss, either of property or life, could ever
have occurred.
"AUGUST

17TH.

"I resume my narrative from where I left off
in my report of yesterday, I perceive that I
omitted to state that the residence of the Rev.
R. E. Aitkins was set on fire sometime about
two o'clock A.If., and what makes this worse,
the Rev. gentleman was a complete invalid, and
report says that the state of excitement into
which he was thrown, has terminated fatally,
but this I cannot say that I positively know,
nor can I rely on hearsay tales. I have also to
report that the elegant mansion of W. Parker,
Esq., has shared the same fate, and nothing is
to be seen but a heap of ruins at either of those
places.
" A public meeting was suddenly called by
the influentials of Hanley and Shelton, to devise
the best means of relieving the distresses of
the inhabitants of this once flourishing district.
This meeting was addressed by Mr. Moses
Simpson, W. Ridgway, Esq., Mr. John Richards,
and Mr. Win. Ellis, from Burslem. Much good
'speaking was the result, but just as the meeting
wasabout to come to some definite conclusion,
the arrival of a body of military put a stop to any
urther proceedings; but not before the.Chartists
had passed a vote for the whole Charter. Mr.
Ridgway earnestly requested the meeting to stand
firin as it:as a legal public meeting, condUcting

itself in a peaceallemanner, and that the milf.
tary had no right to interfere. A magistrate
was with the military, (I hear a Rev.) and he, in
true bharacter, ordered the meeting to bedispersed, which was done. The Rev. Gentleman
then read the Riot Act, and gave strict orders
that all persons found in the streets should be arrested,
I have also omitted to state, that there are'
pawnshops in the townships of Hanley and Shel-.
ton, and a number of persons of both sexes, but
mostly females, surrounded the pawn-brokers,
demanding the goods which thev had pledged,
and though several persons addressed them
urging that it would be unjust in them to take
back by force what they had pledged unless they
paid the money they had on those goods, yet the
women would have no nay: their clothes they
would have, and being emboldened by considerable numbets, forced their way into the pawnshops and served themselves, getting n6t their
own property but anything that came to their
hands, and taking many things belonging to other
persons. This morning I witnessed a spring cart
full of females, guarded by both horse and foot,
taken to Newcastle; and some men on foot, between the sections of infantry, were likewise
taken to the same place, for examination before
the magistrates, and no doubt but most of them
will be committed for trial at the next sessions.
" In my last I stated that two men were killed
at Burslem, it is now certain that one was shot
dead, the other, though very seriously wounded,
may still recover; his name is Jerrold, a bricks
layer, at Stoke-upon-Trent.
DEWSBURY.
WEDNESDAY

NIGHT.

"While I am now writing, the turn-outs are
just returned to town; there cannot be less than
twenty thousand-all sober, steady, straight.
forward men,-who apparently seem more de.termined than ever for the general stand. They
have been round to Ossett, Horbury, Healey,
Middletown, and Thornhill, where they have
stopped all hands without the'least interruption.
" The authorities have been sitting all day
swearing in any body they could for special constables.
"The millowners of Batley have compelled
their men to be sworn in as specials, so as they
can commence work in the morning: but, as far
is I can learn, the assembled turn-outs in the
town arejetermined to resist it.
" The town is completely in the hands of the
turn-outs--all peaceable.

But I am afraid if

any inteatption be offered it will not be for loang

3 24
as they appear determined to have their object the impression made upon me by the view of that
meeting as long as I live. I proceeded in Lin-=
efore they return to work again."
"TO THE SHAKSPERIAN BRIGADE
OF LEICESTER CHARTISTS..
" Manchester, Marsdens Temperance Hotel,
" Wednesday Morning, Aug. 17th, 1842.
"My BRAVE COMRADES,-I left you on
Tuesday afternoon, the 9th instant, and between
that date and the present, one of the most important periods in the history of the workingmen of this country has commenced. Of the
widely-extended strike for labour's wages, which
has been pretty generally converted into a
stand for the Charter, you will be already
aware, by the daily and weekly papers. Whether that widely-spread resolve has entered
into your minds and hearts, at the time I am
writing this, I feel some anxiety to learn. But
I must hasten to rehearse some of the passages
of my diversified experience since the day I left
you.
I had a good meeting at Birmingham, in the
11all of Science, (a very commodious building belonging to the Socialists) on the Tuesday evening.
I found George White to be what I had long
heard him reported to be-a sound-hearted,
thorough-going democrat. I enrolled twentyfour at the close of the meeting. I had long
and very interesting conversations the next day
with White, and learned much from him respecting the progress of the movement in and around
Birmingham, and the causes why in Birmingham
itself, things for some time looked less satisfactory than could be wished. At night (Wednesday) we had a good meeting out of doors, near
the Railway Station, notwithstanding a heavy
rain.
" On Thursday began a series of excitements,
such as I had hitherto been a stranger to. I was
set down at twelve at noon, by the omnibus, at
Wednesbury, (called Wedgebury by the natives)
in the midst of 30,000 colliers on strike for wages.
They formed one of the noblest sights I ever
witnessed. Linney, O'Neil, Pearson, and others
addressed them; conclusive resolutions, binding
the whole assembly to desist altogether from
labour until their just demands were complied
with, were put and carried unanimously and enthusiastically. I then briefly addressed this immense gathering of labour's sons; a vast assemblage of human eyes, all raised in expectant
intelligence-brave bosoms thrown open to the
sun and air, and stalwart arms and stot hands

i

negs company to Bilston. For two mortal hour s
I addressed the favourite brigade-the "body
guard" of our brave chief, Feargus, in the evening. There were about 4,000 present on a piece
of ground formed like an amphitheatre, where
they sat in fixed earnestness, receiving my plain
remarks, apparently as enthusiastic at the close,
as at the beginning. The view of the massive
hands of those brave colliers, raised in approval
of the Charter, convinced me in a twinkling of
O'Connor's shrewdness in selecting the " black
brigade of Bilston Chartists" as his " body
God help the poor fellow that proguards."
vokes a blow from the shoulder-of-mutton fist of
a Bilston collier ! We enrolled fifty members at
the close of the Bilston meeting. Linney assured me that the whole region was rife with

Chartism : this honest, independent, and brave
man has been indefatigable in his labours among
this bold and simple-hearted people: there is
not a man in the whole movement who, in my
judgment, deserves more highly the praise and
confidence of his brother Chartists than Joseph
Linney.
On Friday morning, the 12th, I walked on to
Wolverhampton, and addressed another meeting
of the hardy toilers of the " black diamonds"the whole district, for many miles, having entirely ceased labour, and nothing being more
easy than to get an out-door meeting of thousands upon thousands at this time of excitement
the Wolverhampton colliers, like the assemblages
I had previously addressed, held up their mighty
hands with one accord, and instantly, when I
asked them if they would espouse the cause of
the Charter.
In the afternoon, I got on by railway to Stafford. I found matters in a somewhat critical
condition in this Tory-ridden borough. Mason,
and his companions in tribulation, are confined
in the gaol here: one hundred and fifty colliers
had been also lodged in it within the weektroops of soldiers had been marched into the
town-additional rooms were being built to the
gaol-cannon, it was said, was to be planted upon
the extreme towers-and everything looked so
threatening, that when the friends here took a
bill to the printer, announcing my lecture, he
did not dare to print it. Great fears were entertained that I wbuld be apprehended if I dared to
stand up in the market-place that night. However, when seven o'clock had struck, there I was

-mounted on a famous long bench, procured by
the friends. The superintendent of police then
took his station close by my right elbow, the
heartiness, the very
held up with instantaneous
and ladies threw up their windows to
whether they would tory gentry
moment that I put it to them
listen and hear the rebel Chartist commit him-.
all adopt the People's Charter. I shalt not lose

self, and to see him, pounced upon and borne under-his cell, in spite of the bayonets, and the
away in the dirty claws of the raw lobsters. But
no I shewed how excellent it was to have a
" Sweet little silver-voiced lady,"
and pay our million and a quarter yearly to support herself and her establishment. I demonstrated that loyal Chartists knew the land would
be ruined if the civil list were not kept up ? and
that working men would all weep their eyes sore
if Adelaide were to be bereft of her £100,000at
a-year. I denounced any ragged shoemaker
(Stafford, like Northampton, you know, my
brave Shakspeareans, is a famous shoemaking
town,) as a stupid fellow if he dared to talk about
his aged grandmother being in a bastile and vegetating on skilly, while the Dowager had three
palaces to live in. The satire completely blunted
the talons of the blue-bottle; his hard face relaxed, his teeth separated, and at length he
grinned outright, while the host of shopmates
burst into laughter.
Well-what was to be done ? I could not be
taken up for treason, for my words were ultraloyal, with a witness! Three villainous red-coats,
standing in the crowd, soon solved the difficulty:
they looked on and listened till they were laughed
out of countenance, and then turned their attention to a couple of Italians who had just brought
Determined on
their music into the Square.
making a disturbance, one of the red-coats at first
coaxed, and then dragged, one of the foreigners
among the crowd, and strove earnestly to incite
the musician to " grind." Perceiving the scoundrel's intention, I called on the policeman to
witness it; but saw, from his looks, that he

multitude dispersed.
That night will be a memorable one with the
Stafford Crispins; and I trust they will not
neglect to annoy their enemies with ammunition
so easily mustered and so pleasantly expended as
a little throat-music.
We'll rally around him," I should have said,
became a favourite at the places Jhave already

passedas well as at Stafford.
Let me just say, ere leaving Stafford, that,
Peplow, Hunnible, and other fine young fellows,
are growing up there, who will soon be able to
act an important part in the movement.
The farther I went, my beloved comrades, the
I
more thickly I found excitement kindling.
reached the Potteries on Sunday afternoon, and
found a spirit I really was not prepared for.
Labour had ceased there also among the col;
liersand now, the resolution not to labour, I
found, was taking a decided turn: all were intent on working no more till the great struggle
for. the rights of labour had been tried. We
had meetings at Fenton and Lane-end, on the
Sunday afternoon, Aug. 14th, and at night I
preached from " Thou shalt do no murder," on
the large area called the " Crown-bank," at
Hanley. The time was very exciting, and I gave
notice that I would address the colliers on' strike
on the same spot, the next morning, at eight
o'clock. A large assembly appeared at that time
the resolution, that all working men cease labour
till the Charter become the law of the land, was
put and 'econded by working men, and carried

-would not budge one inch to put down the annoyance, while he would gladly seize me as the primary cquse of disturbance, I therefore ~aid, "
am willing to go to prison for speaking truth;
the chief policeman take me, if he will, for
let
speaking truth; but I will not be imprisoned for
a dirty row! All you who are of opinion that we
adjourn to the Common, where we can hold a
meeting without disturbance, hold up your
hands." The adjournment was carried, and I
dismounted in a moment, and off we went, the
I commenced singing
people following us.
"Spread the Charter;" the bold Crispins
caught the strain, and our procession to the
Common was soon swelled by thousands. We
had a good meeting; and when it was well-nigh
dark, started again for the town, singing " Spread
the Charter." The police were passed, and
The gaol was
looked aghast at this novelty.
reached, the soldiers turned out guard, and
thought the crowd had come to make an attack;
but fairlylaughed when they heard the singing.

and ensiblq
triumphantly? and after few he
words from old daddy Richards (whose heart,
God bless him! is as sound as an acorn in the
people's cause) the meeting dispersed, with the
intent, on the part of the colliers, to ask all the
workers at the earthenware factories, &c., to
leave their labour. I remained in Hanley during
the day; saw the shops closed, and all the town
become as lifeless as on a Sunday forenoon
heard of the multitude doing queer things in the
town, and also at Stoke, Fenton, and Lane-end;
but saw none of them. The soldiers, nearly
dropping with fatigue, I saw pass through the
town in the afternoon, pursuing something which,
it seemed, they could not catch; but nothing
alarming ever came before my own eyes.
I met the people again at six o'clock. The
Square was crowded; I should say there were
20,000 people there; several of the gentry, &c.,
in conversational knots, being on the verge of
the crowd. I protested against the insobriety I
saw in the persons of a few,-proclaimed the ille-

Three cheers were given for poor Mason, close

gality of destroying property, &c.; but exhorted

Y

326
h0 people to: hold by their rightful resolves, and
to hold by them, too, till they had their rights.
I felt sure I might be prevented getting out of
the Potteries, if I did not make an effort to get
away privately, and as I was bound to attend the
Manchester conference, in quality of delegate
from the excited district I was leaving, as well as
being your representative, my darling boys,why I set out-on foot, with two hearty youths as
companions, at half-past twelve on Monday
pight.
The droll adventures of that night I will record in another letter, for I must now be off to
the conference.
I am,
My brave brigade,
Your faithful " General,"
THOMAS COOPER.

Marsden's Temperance Hotel,
Wednesday Night, Aug. 17.
P.S. I have scarcely time left to tell you how
I got out of the Potteries.
Suffice it to say,-I was seized, taken before
fine old Justice, examined before him as he sat
ap in bed, told him who I was and all about it;
but they dared not keep me! This was at Burslem, at two o'clock on Tuesday morning. I intended, with the two good lads who carried my
bag and cloak, to reach Macclesfield by seven,
in order to take the coach for Manchester; but
as we had been detained by the Burslem authorities so long, we struck down for the Crewe
Station, on the Birmingham and Manchester line
of railway: and, after losing our way twice, we
reached Crewe in time to have a hearty good
breakfast before the train started.
To my great delight, I got into the carriage
containing my beloved Bairstow, Campbell, and
Clarke, a young delegate from Ross, in Herefordshire.
From the Star you will learn what was done
at the Conference; I will not, therefore, take up
valuable space by saying a word about it.
Finally, my brave comrades, I am now about
to set out, privately, from Manchester, after having just read the horrid piece of hypocrisy and
cruelty which the Morning Chronicle has chosen
to insert against me, in its leading article of today. What villains are these scribblers for the
Anti-corn-law League! In order to clear themselves from the charge of originating the strike,
they strive to incite the Tory government to take
may blood, or personal liberty, by pointing me
out as an agent for the Tories !
Heaven grant we may be able to turn this
strike to our advantage, and thereby have our revenge on the hypocritical League.

When and where I shall see you, my beloved
lads, I cannot tell until the time comes.
Yours, to the death,
THOMAS COOPER.

FROM OUR THIRD EDITION OF LAST WEEK.

"FURTHER PROGRESS.
" Northern Star Ofice,
" Saturday Morning, Two o' Clock.
" When the wicked bend their bow, they not
unfrequently shoot beyond the mark they aimed
at, We to-day despatched our own reporter
into the disturbed districts, to learn the real
state of matters up to the latest moment; and
from his statement, which we subjoin, the League
men appear to have done so in this instance.
Their object, doubtless, in the forcing on and
sustaining of this preconcerted strike, was to
confine it to the adjuncts of machinery in mills
and factories.
We imagine that their purpose
extended not further than the lightening of their
present heavy stock of manufactured goods by a
temporary cessation of productive power in that
particular department; while they might make it
also serve the purpose of verifying their statements of the people's discontent and their predictions of "risings and riotings" for food; and
so of procuring for them another " Extension of
Commerce" for the keeping up of the golden
showers to which they have become so habituated
that they take badly to a change of weather:
while, as we have already said, their further object was to make it also a weapon against Chartism. Theylhave over-reached themselves ! The
wicked are taken in their own snare! and the
sham-Chartist League strike seems, from our reporter's statement, tohavebecome a Chartist strike
in good earnest, so far as Manchester, at least,
is concerned. The trades generally have now followed out the mill hands. They appreciate the
kind feeling of their League friends in forcing
out their brethren; they think what is good for
some must be good for all; and so have turned
out for company. While they reason, truly and
like statesmen, that their efforts might as well
point to a primary as to a secondary benefit; that
there is little use in obtaining an advantage of
which they may again be deprived to-morrow;
and that therefore the thing in which they are
most interested is not so much the prevention of
the present reduction, nor even the obtaining a
present advance in wages, as the securing of that
political power of self-protection which may enable them to bring their labour to the market free
from the iniquitous and oppressive disadvantages
which now beat down its value. This is a glorious conclusion. It is a point worth struggling
for; worth suffering for; worth passing through

3M7
some risk and hazard for; because, once gained,
it cannot fail to compensate.
" Our opinion on the means now used for its
attainment by the trades of Manchester was re-'
gistered three years ago. That opinion has undergone no change. A cessation from labour, to
be effectual to the carrying of any political object,
must be national and simultaneous: it cannot
then fail to be successful, because it indicates the
nation's will, against which, in its full strength,
whether positively, or thus negatively, manifested, no power can stand; but a mere sectional
display of this most decisive of all the forms
of moral force, like a mere sectional display of
physical resistance, is sure to be overpowered by
the strength of faction, consisting in its immense
wealth and its organized physical resources.
" If then the strike is to be a Chartist strike,
it must become universal: not merely Manchester, but every town in England, Wales, and
Scotland, must at once-as one man and with one
voice-declare the purpose of the people to be
free; and such a declaration will be to those
whom it concerns the fiat of omnipotence. But
if Manchester, or even Lancashire, sustain the
struggle singly, it will be unsuccesful, and, in all
probability, retard the movement it was meant
to hasten. Let the country see to this ; the men
of Lancashire have done nobly; let their brethren throughout the empire arouse; let them
speak out at once, like men, and say, 'Yes' or
' No,' to the great question of 'shall we now
strike for thePharter?' No higgling-no hesitatation-no waiting :
If, when done, 'twere well done,
Then, 'twere well it were done quickly.'
" Never, however, for one moment let it be
forgotten by any Chartist, that to be successful
they must be peaceful. They have a right to
strike, but they have no right to riot. They have
a right to work or not to work, but they have no
right to break windows, destroy property, or burn
factories.
"Above all things, they have no right to insult,
annoy, or fight with the police force or the soldiery. Every hellish invention will be practised
to induce them to do this: let the bridle be kept
tightly on their tempers and even on their
tongues: let them even patiently bear annoyance,
insult and indignity; resenting them only by the
calmness of a manly contempt, the offspring of
a lofty purpose not to be turned aside.
It
41 rejoices us to see from our reporter's statement that it is so now. That the people laugh
at all efforts to bring them into collision with
the soldiery. Right thankful are we that our
often and again reiterated lessons of forbearance

have been thus appreciated, even by a starving
people, goaded as they are. Let but this spirit
be still manifested; the "risings and the riots ',
left to to the infernal hatchers of the plot; the
calm determination of the people held up to its
point; the enemy disarmed by peacefulness;
and the strike becomes universal - England,
Wales, and Scotland presenting at the same moment one workless workshop-while the dogs
of war have no pretence to tear; and the fiends
of faction will soon " scratch their heads," and
knowing such an " asking" to be equivalent to
" taking," will give the Charter in a trice, and
thankful to be thus let off.
" But mind! to be thus effective it must be
universal. The rolling of the ocean's waters bears
away the dam upon which, though running in
the same direction, the rivulet makes no impression, and the stream expends its force in vain.
"Let nothing, therefore, be done hastily. By
hastily we mean thoughtlessly, and without due
consideration.
' The attempt, and not the deed
Destroys us.'
"If the people are prepared to carry out a national strike let them do so: but let them not
attempt it without first knowing that they can
carry it out. The vauntings and boastings of a
few thousands of too-zealous men; the passing
of resolutions declaratory of their intention never to return to work until the Charter becomes
law; and then the failure of all this for want of
due support; and the finish of the whole by the
' going in' of these parties, without the Charter,
and without any other practical advantage, probably to the great disadvantage of many of
them, would have a great tendency to dispirit
the people; to damp their ardour in the movement; and to throw seriously back the Charter
agitation. This, no true patriot could desire:
and yet from all the circumstances that we are
able to see of the whole case, we fear that this
will be just the effect of a perseverance in the
present movement. We see no chance of its
becoming national. There has been no concert,
save amongst the rascals of the League. There
is no organization for it. There are no means
upon which for the different sections of the
people to fall back for sustenance, while the
flame spreads through the land. And it seems
almost unnatural to express that the corrupt
tree of Corn-law League plottery should produce
any fruit so wholesome as the bending of the
whole energies of the whole people at one time

328.
towards one point; and again we repeat, that or let it not be attempted. Let the 'Leaguers
unless that be so, the whole will be, as far as who have attempted the reduction, be battled
Clartism is concerned, a miserable failure, and singly by the people of their districts; and
do us much harm. There is no power in any made to feel that a single Leaguer is as powersection of the country to remain out for any less against a large section of the people, as a
length of time, without coming in contact with section of the people is against all the force of
the law. The people must have food. If a faction. Thus will the strike return to its
general cessation of labour in any given district original character, and be productive, if not of
be kept up for a considerable length of time, a benefit, at least of less mischief than we appregreat portion of the people of that district must hend from it should it remain sectional, and yet
obtain food by means which will bring them tend politically. The question is one of the
into collision with the authorities; and this highest importance and greatest delicacy that
must end in the infliction upon many of them the people can entertain. Let it not be enterof at least a much greater amount of destitution tained thoughtlessly ! Let them bring to it
and suffering than they before endured; to say deep consideration and expansive views; taking
nothing of all the proscriptions, the imprison- in the whole range of circumstances, effects,
ments, the transportings, ahd, perhaps, the and consequences; and God speed them in their
hangings; nothing of all the shootings and efforts for Right !"
saberings, to which it may be a prelude. An
Mr. O'CONNOR :-That is the case
universal strike would be free from these risks; for the defence, and a very good defence it
for its very appearance and existence would at is, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:once paralyse the arm of power, and sicken the
heart of faction: while a sectional one; of May it please your Lordship, gentlemen
almost whatever magnitude, could only, and of the jury, I sincerely congratulate you
certainly would only, be productive of the evils on the prospect that your labours will
terminate this evening; and I shall cerwe have just described.
"'Dearly,therefore, as we should love to see tainly endeavour, notwithstanding the
the millions with one shout throw down their mass of matter before me, to condense
into,as short a space as my duty to the
tools, and throw up their hands, and fold up
public will permit, the observations I shall
their arms, while faction stood, as she would
make on the evidence to which your atthen stand, amazed, dismayed and powerless,
tention has been drawn during the course
we yet fear that this will not now be the case; of this protracted
trial. Gettlemen, I
and, therefore, we regret that the Charter move- could wish, not merely that we were asment should have been at all mixed up with the sembled in the court of this great county
strike. We fear that it will eventually be found of Lancashire, but that the eyes of the
to have only served the purpose of the enemy. whole nation were upon us; and the ears
Lothe would we be to damp the ardour, to the of the whole people ready to hear every
slightest extent, of any of our friends; but we thing that passes upon this occasion. I
should be still more lothe to permit them un- entirely agree with what has been stated,
wittingly to harm the cause without warning. that this is one of the most important
We pretend not to infallibility of judgment; trials that ever occurred; and if I felt
we presume not to dictate a course of action. considerable responsibility when I had
the people will determine on their own course; the honour to address you several days
but they have a right to our opinion, and while ago, I must say, that I do not feel that
we have power of wielding tongue or pen, they responsibility diminished by the evidence
shall always have it honestly, without fear or that has been given on the part of the
favour. We have, then, on this matter, given prosecution, and by the statements that
iur opinion. Let the people give it its own have been made by the several defendvalie. They will weigh well the whole circum- ants. Gentlemen, it is impossible not
stances, and determine for themselves upon the to feel the deepest sympathy with the
distress that, no one can-possiblydoubt,
question of STRIKE or no STRIKE: but if the
so extensively existed in the neighbourstrike is to be for the Charter, let it be national,
hood of Manchester, and throughout a
and let it be simultaneous; not progressing
considerable tract of country surrounding
slowly, but at once bringing out every place;
that large manufacturing place. I have

329
no doubt that, if you could quit the large
public meetings that assembled, as it was
said, " to quiet the country," and could
go to the dwellings of those who did not
join in those exciting crowds, you would
hear many a tale of heart-rending distress, such as the defendant Pilling told
you yesterday-distress which it was impossible to bear without the most enlarged
Scompassion and the deepest sympathydistress which produced in many persons
around me emotions in which I shared,
and, I am not ashamed to say, that I
shared in them to an extent, which, in
common with many around me, almost
unmanned me, and prevented me from
maintaining that demeanour that one
ought to preserve in a court of justice.
Gentlemen, if anything could be learned
as to the extent and character of that
distress, and the patience with which, in
many instances, it has been borne, when
it has not been carried into public meetings, nor made the theme of public declamation, you must go to those places
where it has been mourned over in
private-where the parties have sunk under it in silence, from a sense of duty
and that it afforded them no justification in having recourse to violence.
It might be well if all that was stated on
this occasion were known through the
whole length and breadth of the land,
so that if anything could be done to arrest
the progress of that distress, and to bring
comfort and consolation to those who are
suffering, it might be done. But, gentlemen, having, and with perfect sincerity, offered that tribute of sympathy
which it was impossible to withholdhaving given to those, who suffered that
distress with a fortitude which we admire,
the tribute of my highest admiration, I
must pass from that topic to the state of
the country at the period when this outbreak occurred: and I must call your
attention, for a moment or two, to the
alarming danger that threatened the peace
and well-being-nay, I may almost say,
the existence of society in this country.
Gentlemen, we have the confession from
Pilling himself-he denied it not, when
he addressed you, that he had gone from
place to place, and addressed not less
than 300,000 persons, at different places.
You have had it in evidence that there
were outbreaks-I pause not now to enu-

merate the places were, and the numbers
by whom, nor the degree of threat and
intimidation short of actual violence by
which the acquiescence of the mill-owners
and the labouring classes was producedbut, you have it in evidence that from
fifty to one hundred mills were stopped,
and that labour ceased every where. I
might take a placard-that I shall presently call your attention to-the placard
headed," Gold! Gold! Gold!!" in which
it is stated that labour is suspended, and
the credit of the country is gone: and I
ask you, gentlemen, what was the condition of this part of the empire at the time
when troops were paraded about to stop
the tumult, when special constables were
sworn in by hundreds ere the pro,
tecting providence of heaven, the energy
of the executive government, and the local magistrates, succeeded in restoring
peace and order ? Happiness and plenty
of work and wages, it was not in their
power to restore. Gentlemen, were we at
that moment otherwise than on the brink
of a civil war ? Let me ask any of you-I
ask not by any exaggeration of the facts,
or by the use of one expression that is
calculated to excite your feelings, but, I
ask you to look back and say, whether a
man might not be a bold man and yet
sicken at the danger in which the country was placed during the whole of the
month of August ? But one week more
of apathy--but one week more of that
spirit which induced the magistrates "to
say " It is better not to resist"-and you
would have had the country divided into
two large classes, contending against each
other for power and for the existence of
society. And has the defendant Pilling,
or any man who has mourned over hiV
son dying prematurely by the visitation
of God, through disease, and who had
mourned over his own and his family's
discomfort, considered what would have
been the wide-spread horrors and miseries
through the country if the masses had
acted as he was satisfied it was the intention of the executive address to induce
them to act,. and which I charge on all
who published it, or gave it encouragement and support, and, above all, those
who published the document which alluded to the propriety of enforcing that
address, pointing it out to the public as a
manly, bold, and spirited address, which.

330
called on them not to speculate on politicdl questions, but practically to adopt
those schemes which would carry out the
views of those who penned that address.
Gentlemen, it has been said that this is
a political prosecution; it has been said
that this prosecution is levelled at the
Charter and the Chartists. Gentlemen,
I utterly deny any such statements. I
know it was expected to be so, that I am
quite aware of. From the time that my
learned friend, Mr. Dundas, two days
ago, had undertaken to defend the points
ofthe Charter, and since then, down to the
time when the last man addressed them,
personal hostility to the Chartists has
'been imputed to me, and it has been said
that this prosecution was levelled at the
Charter :-but, gentlemen, I beg to say,
that there is not one tittle of truth in,
or foundation for, any of those remarks.
The speeches, therefore, in which the
imputations were conveyed, must have
been previously prepared, and yet those
who delivered them did not think it worth
while to suppress the observations, though
-they found that I said nothing to justify
those remarks. Why, gentlemen, o far
from calling on you to condemn the
Charter, or to enter into the slightest
question respecting it, I expressly disclaimed, as you, my Lord, and gentlemen
'of the jury, may remember, going into
any political discussion at all. I stated
that I had not to consider whether any
proposed change would be for the better
or the worse, but that it was my duty to
call your attention to the fact, that some
change was proposed, and to ask you to
consider the manner in which that change
was proposed to be brought about. Certainly it is as well at all times that the
advocate should make truth his object.
Mr. O'Connor seems to have thought he
had an advantage in bringing before you
some passages of an address which I
delivered to a jury when Frost and his
associates were under trial for high treason. Gentlemen, I know not whether
you do me or Mr. O'Connor the honour
much to attend to a speech supposed to
lave been delivered on a former occasion.
'One might, as an advocate, take some
rifuge in altered circumstances, and the
faict of being placed in a different position, but Ihave never, as a member of
the profession to which I have the honor

to belong, resorted, or had occasion to
resort, to any suih excuse for what I have
said. What I have stated on the occasion referred to, I am ready, syllable by
syllable, to repeat to-day, aye, gentlemen,
even to my reference to the verdict, when
I said how desirable it would be even if
a verdict of acquittal could be pronounced
as a verdict of truth. Gentlemen, there
is another subject upon which observations have been made connected with the
enquiry before you, and that is the in.
dictment. My learned friend Baines exclaimed, "Did ever man hear of this sort
of indictment ?" " Here," says my learned
friend, and the observation has been repeated, I think, by the several defendants
who have spoken,-'" here," said he, "is
a monstrous indictment." Gentlemen, I
beg to say, that it must have been known
that in the state trials in the reign of
William and Mary, after, the revolution,
there were, I thin. , 100 persons included
in one indictment. Why ? Because they
were supposed to be all guilty of the
same crime which was charged upon
them. At the sessions, at Salford, before the Chester trials came on, fiftyseven persons were included in one indictment; and when those acting entirely on
the part of the prosecution, out of regard
to convenience, and with reference to
the facts done-where a mob broke, into
the workhouse at Stockport-divided the
persons accused into portions of six,
seven, or eight in number, as the evidence applied to them more particularly;
the learned judges condemned that course
of proceeding, and said, that the break.ing into the Stockport workhouse, and
the carrying away of bread and money,
was one transaction, that they were all
parties to it, and should be included in
one indictment. I could excuse the observations of the other defendants, but
those of Mr. Baines, who is acquainted
with the doctrine of indictments, as I
had a ight to expect he should be -I
think, from him at least such observations were not to be expected. Another
remark was made about conspiracy: my
learned friend Baines begun it, and Mr.
O'Connor continued it. Now, I think
it right before I enter into an investigation of the evidence, to state to you,
what I apprehend to be-subject of
course, to my Lord's correction-th.

.331

legal ldoctriie of conspiracy.
Ih thef
first place a conspiracy imputes, necessaaily, nothing secret, it may be secret or
,it may not. It might be as well perhaps, if, in framing the indictment originally, the word conspiracy was omitted,
though I do not know whether it does
not as well express, as any other word
in the English language, that which is
charged on the defendants. A conspiracy is a combination of a number of
persons, either to do some unlawful act,
:orto do some lawful act by unlawful
means. And whenever you find any
:number of persons, by agreement and
.concert, either doing an unlawful act, or
doing a lawful by unlawful means, these
parties are guilty of what the law calls
conspiracy. It is not necessary to constitute the conspiracy, that this should be
.done secretly. It might be done in the
open face of day, and the sun shining.
If a man was unpopular in his neighbourhood, and a number of persons went
to the front of his house, using abusive
language and breaking his windows,
,uch parties were guilty of conspiracy,
although their acts might be done in
public, if they were acting towards one
common object, though they might not
be personally known to each other, and
though they never exchanged words with
-each other on the subject. There is no
magic in the word conspiracy. Beyond
The violation of the law and the opprobrium that every where attaches to a
violation of the law, I am not aware that
the crime of conspiracy is greater, or so
great, as many others that might be mentioned. But it is averred that every man
charged with conspiracy must go the
whole length of every other one implicated in it. Gentlemen, that is not so.
There never was a legal proposition laid
down which had more incorrectness in it
than that. Mr. O'Connor, who is a
member of the bar-the Irish bar-and
who, I understand, has practised for
several years as a barrister in the sister
kingdom-must have known that it was
perfectly possible for one man to take a
share in a transaction subordinate or
inferior to others; but still, if they were
all acting towards one common end and
object, they were guilty -of the crime of
conspiracy. The very act of concurring in
Zarrying out a design, knowing that others

are bound together in pursuance of the
same object, is sufficient to constitute a
conspiracy.
You want no general
meeting; you merely want evidence
of a common design-you merely want
evidence that parties are acting together
for some illegal objects: that is all.
Now, having called your attention to the
nature of the indictment, and to what I
consider (subject to my Lord's correction,)
to be the doctrine of conspiracy, I propose
to examine the history of the events from
about the Ist of August, till a little later,
in order that yaou may see what is really
the question that is to be brought before
you. Gentlemen, it is very true I did
not take up your time, in opening the
case, by mentioning the names of many
of the defendants: I think I mentioned
Scholefield, I am sure I mentioned some
others. But it did not appear to me,
that that was the time to mention the
name of every individual, and the part he
had in it. Now is the time for me to
call your attention to the evidence laid
before you, and fairly, and I trust ingenuously and candidly, to ask your opinion on those points to which I called
your attention when I opened the case.
Gentlemen, the whole story is told almost
in two words: it is, tumult or intimidation out of Manchester, it is encouragement within Manchester. That is the
case for the prosecution. Now, let us
see how that case is established. What
I charged by the evidence i's
this, that;
before the 9th of August, there had
been meetings in the neighbourhood
of Manchester, and these meetings at
first probably had no other object
than to produce a strike with reference to wages. But advantage was takeri
of the excited condition of the people,
immediately the question of the Charter
was brought forward, and the people
were invited to come to a resolution, the
effect of which was, not merely that they
should turn-out as workmen, but that
they should go from mill to mill, and
from factory to factory, and stop other
people from working.
Gentlemen, is
there any evidence of that ? I believe
it is perfectly clear with respect to
some of the defendants whom I manst
mention by and by-I do not want now
to weaken the general statement whieh I
am making, by calling .your attention

332
more particularly to them at present, but
it is perfectly clear that some of the defendants, on the 5th of August, were in
the ranks of the turn-outs, but having no
more to do with them, as regarded their
occupation than you or I, but perhaps less.
Let me call your attention to this fact.
Messrs. Bailey's men were on Friday,
the 5th of August, dismissed by their
masters; and were told that, if they would
not consent to the reduction, they had
better go and take a holyday. I know it
was said, that that was delivered in a
tone extremely offensive to the people.
I hope that that was misunderstood. If
it was uttered in a careless manner, as if
sneering at the distress under which they
laboured, I think it could not be too
much deprecated. I should hope that
was not the case. I have no right to believe it was intended to insult the distress
which they professed they could not relieve. Gentlemen, there was a procession that very day. There was a meet'ing in the evening, and speeches were
made, and who, think you, gentlemen,
are found among the ranks who were at
that meeting ? The defendant Fenton.
The defendant Durham. The defendant
Stevenson, and the defendant Mahon. I
think from the evidence of one of the
witnesses, a person named Brophy was
there in the evening. What had he to do
with Bailey's mills or his men. Were
they persons who turned out? No.
What connection had he, or the other
defendants whom I have mentioned, with
Bailey's mills ? None. I do think that
with reference to that meeting they weie
hovering about to deliver Lectures and
put themselves on any discontented body
of men on whom they could fasten themselves. That is the statement I made in
the outset. I did not mention the names
connected with this transaction, because
I had not proved it. It is in evidence
before you that, on the evening of the 6th
of August, these five persons were joining the turn-outs-Bailey's men-making speeches and carrying resolutions.
Three of these defendants were shoemakers, one a lecturer, and the occupation of the other I do not know, but not
one of them was a cotton spinner, or had
any connection with Bailey's men. Durham was a shoemaker, Fenton was a
shoemaker, and Mahon was a shoemaker.

Gentlemen, [ don't want, where the case
was not distinctly made out, to add anything that could operate by way of prejudice. On Saturday there was no meeting. I believe, on Sunday, there was a
meeting. Now, does any man suppose
that I object to any persons assembling
for the peaceable purpose of offering up
their devotions, and hearing the pious
exhortations of any person whom they
may look up to as a pastor. Nothing
like it. I don't object to that. Nor,
gentlemen, do I suggest that that was a
cloak for their other proceedings. I do
not suggest that. I say it in perfect
good faith. I am not insinuating that
which I do not mean to avow. I have
no doubt that when they sang the hymn,
the large majority of them were joining
in what they considered to be a religious
exercise. And when they listened to religious exhortations they thought, no
doubt, that they were profitably spending
the Lord's day, or as much of it as was
devoted to that purpose. But that was
not all that was done; when the singing
was over, then came the resolutions and
political lectures; and to that, gentlemen, I decidedly object. An appointment was then made for the following
morning; and, accordingly, the next
day, we trace them going round stopping
all the mills, turning out the hands, and
compelling them to join their ranks, and
on Tuesday morning they marched into
Manchester.
Now, gentlemen, here I
may perhaps observe upon these assemblies. I may be asked, what is a lawful
assembly ? Why, gentlemen, in the first
place every assembly of the constituted
authorities of the land, and, under their
sanction, for any great public purpose, is,
undoubtedly, a lawful assembly. Persons
may meet in those parish assemblies; they
maymeet in the Hundred Court,forCounty
Court, for other purposes than to elect
county members; they may meet wherever
there is any public business to transact.
Men have an undoubted right to meet for
public discussion, as to matters that affect
them, wherever such meeting is not expressly forbidden; as, I believe, in some
instances it would be, with reference to a
public discussion in the vestry of a
church. But, in general, people have a
right to express their opinions on public
occasions, in reference to public affairs.

X33
-But it is not to be supposed that I assent* excitement, and having a tendency to
to the doctrine that every man has a right produce a practically evil effect on those
Gentle- who were already out on strike, and doing
to meet wherever he pleases.
men, I deny that men have a right to mischief and damage in various directions.
go in large numbers to a distance from I say that that placard ought not to be
%their
homes, and create alarm and terror treated as a merely seditious libel, but as
to those whom they visited, when they a part of the mischief going on, and
have no lawful purpose of meeting. which that libel was calculated-to borrow
Above all, gentlemen, they have not a its very language-" to extend and enright to meet to the number of 15000 or force." And when I am told that I have
20000, under the pretence of " queting collected a large number of defendants,
.the neighbourhood." You will judge I ask what else can I do ? I have, I befrom what you have heard, in the course lieve, no less than thirty persons in the
of this case, out of that box, whether a indictment who were present at the conmeeting of that description can be a ference assembled on the 17th of August
,healing and pacific assembly. Well, but last. Acting with that justice, fairness,
it may be said that these delegates had a and impartiality which becomes a public
right to meet. I shall presently come to officer of the crown, how could I present
the meeting of delegates, and perhaps it to your attention some, and leave out
-may be premature now for me to say, others, unless I was satisfied of their inwhat, subject to the correction of his nocence ? And I put it to his Lordship,
Lordship, might be said in reference to after the reprimand which we received
the meeting of the delegates; but, giving at the special commission, when the viothe largest license to public meetings of lation and plunder of the Stockport workevery kind, let me ask whether those house were the subject of comment with
meetings in Ashton, and Stalybridge, the learned Judges, who thought that we
prior to the 5th of August, were lawful should have included all the parties in
assemblies ? Were they all peaceful? one indictment, I had the less reason not
Was there no riot, gentlemen ? I do to include those who we6i the members
Idismiss the charge of riot; I do abandon of the conference in this indictment bethe count for an unlawful assembly, and fore you. Talk of the monstrousness of
.Iwill state to you why. I know it was the indictment! An indictment must be
said by Mr. O'Connor, " Why did you adapted to the crimes it is intended to
not indict the rioters for riot; those who suppress; and if there be a monstrous
committed a breach of the peace for a conspiracy-if there be an association for
breach of the peace; those who had pub- a common object, acting as these delished a seditious placard, for a seditious fendants have acted, why, then the proselibel ?" What my object was in con- cution and the indictment must be adapted
junction with my learned friends whose to the character of the offence, and the
this
advice and assistance I have oil oc- nature of the occasion. Gentlemen, wecasion, was to bring before you what I are told that the gaols are full. What
considered to be the entire crime, which 4re they full of ? Gentlemen, unhapis not committing a riot in one place. It pily crime is at all times too abundwould be taking an extremely imper- ant; but you cannot donbt, from the
feet and partial view of what occurred evidence given before you during the last
in August last to say, that there was a two days, that there are persons in the
riot on Monday at Ashton, and that a gaol at Kirkdale, and at the Castle at
mill was stopped elsewhere, and that on Chester, confined for offences of this
And, gentlemen, where
Tuesday the hands were turned out at description.
Manchester. This would be to take a would be the manliness of sending thosevery imperfect view both of the crime poor persons to pine in prison, who, at
and danger that accompanied it. And the bidding of those lecturers and agitawith respect to prosecuting for a mere tors, had gone out to do those deeds for
seditious libel, let me say, gertlemen, which they were now prosecuted. Where
that the placard alluded to was a most would be the manliness of prosecuting
improper publication, and calculated, them, and leaving them to pine in dunb g sent forth at a period of the greatest geons, and pass by the enlightened mem-

bers of the conference, allowing them to men were willing to turn out." That
go perfectly free? Yes, gentlemen, and was not quite a direct answer to the
Well, but that is no reason
they would use that as an argument, if question.
they were so left :-" Oh, you cannot why you should not assist those who
complain of anything now; as you do were not willing to turn out, where the
,not prosecute us for this, we may do as masters came and said, ' Pray assist us.'"
we like; there is an end of all prosecu- I could get no answer from Sir Thomas
tion;" and, indeed, one of them had said, Potter; and I cannot help thinking, that
-when the " Executive Placard " came out, Sir Thomas Potter had no good and sub-"'If the members of the ' Executive' stantial answer to give. I have no doubt,
are not in custody in twenty-four hours, that 'it was the same temporising policyit is because the Government dare not do which is ever fatal to the public peaceit." It would have been unmanly and which induced the magistrates to withunjust to seize upon the unhappy persons draw the troops, that permitted the mob
goaded by speeches to do the acts for to march into a town like Manchester,
which they were now suffering, and to and to hand it over to them for the space
allow those who goaded them to remain of forty-eight hours. "Well but," says
unprosecuted, and triumphing in the Mr. O'Connor," Down I came, and the
impunity they enjoyed. Gentlemen, let moment I came, all was peace: " and Sir
me call your attention to a few dates; Thomas Potter and several other persons
first, to the 9th of August, when the were called, by way of supporting that
-march on Manchester took place. I have view of the case. I asked Sir Thomas
no intention-I had not before and I have Potter, " How many constables did you
none now-to impute anything to Mr. swear in ? " "Five hundred." "What
Maude, or to the magistrates, beyond troops had you P" "Why, five hundred
confiding in the faith of those who used at first." "How many at last ? "Abou
the expressions, " peace, law, and order," fifteen hundred." "When did you send
and pledged themselves to preserve peace for more ? " " We sent on Saturday,
and order; and who, the moment they the 13th of August." "How long did
had got into Manchester, broke them- you, the magistrates, watch night and
selves up into bands of persons, going day, with the special constables in attend:about stopping all labour, and command- ance, relieving each other? "" For four
ing a complete cessation from toil of weeks at the least." Why, gentlemen,
that would bring us down into the first
every kind. But this is now certainthat the military were withdrawn, by the week in September, at the least. Genconsent, if' not by the direction, of one of tlemen, this was the state of the town of
the magistrates. Says Mr. O'Connor, Manchester when a procession had been
and some other persons, "That proves advertised for the 16thi of August, to cornthat the magistrates saw no danger in it." memorate, I think, the laying of the
Does it, gentlemen ? You saw Sir Tho- foundation stone, or the festival, of
mas Potter in the box to-day, and he Hunt's monument. On the 14th the
made this admission-an extraordinary magistrates put forth a spirited, conadmission, -I think, for a magistrate to stitutional, and proper proclamation,
make :-" Application was made (says a proclamation telling them in substance,
he) that we should assist persons in re- that all assemblies whose object was not
sisting the mob; that we should give of a legal character-that is for the perthem protection. We did not give them formance of some legal duty, and the tenthat protection, and we advised them not dency of which was to create alarm, and
to resist." " What !" said I, "were you danger, should be prohibited. On the
afraid of bloodshed ?" Then the man 15th a proclamation was issued from her
seems to have been roused above the ma- Majesty herself. Mr. Scholefield says he
gistrate. " Oh, no; I afraid! I never perused the magistrates' proclamation and
was afraid of anything; not at all; I had immediately set about postponing his prono kar." "Well, then, will you, Sir cession, and it was postponed; and subThomas, (I beg to ask you with erfect sequently it was extracted from ontie of the
respect), tell me why you took that witnesses that the tea party was also gven
course ? " "Oh,". said Sir.Thomas, " the up. Now, gentlemen, consider thel-te

of thingsat this moment. Ibegto callyour
*attention to this state of things. We are told
"
there is nothing at all in this meeting of the conference. This meeting was
intended six weeks or two months before,
and the object of it was, first, the commemoration of Hunt, (which was abandoned) ; next to heal our differences, and
then to review our organization, and see
if we could make' our body more legal."
Very good, but the public meeting advertised for these purposes is given up, and
the purposes themselves, you will see, are
fairly abandoned; for on the 17th not one
word is spoken about healing differences;
there were none to heal-not one word
about Hunt's monument-not one word
about making their organization more legal; all these were given up, and the lsiness of the conference seemed to be to
promote one common object, and that
was, how they might turn the strike to
the advantage of the Charter. That was
the single object, and you can perceive
that, gentlemen, beyond all doubt. At
the meeting of the trades delegates these
resolutions were passed
4'That, from the statements made before this
delegate meeting, it is evident that a tremendous majority in these great manufacturing
districts are in favour of the People's Charter
becoming the law of the land; and, in confor-

mity with that opinion, it is at this stage of the
proceedings necessary that a definite decision
should be come to relative to the future course
of action to be immediately adopted by the
working classes, stating definitely whether laboar be further suspended, or again resumed."
" That the delegates here assembled recommend their respective constituencies to adopt all
legal means to carry into effect the People's

Charter, and that they send delegates to every
part of the United Kingdom, to endeavour to
get the co-operation of the middle and labouring
classes to carry out the same; and that they

stop work until it becomes the law of the
land."
The JUDGE :---Were these proved ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Yes, my Lord; you will find them in
the evidence of Mr. Hanley-they are
in his notes. Your Lordship will find
a copy of them which I handed up.
Now, gentlemen, the language of this
resolution is comparatively moderate;I

and T quite agree that if it had beea
passed on some other 16th of Augustalthough I believe it to be utterly illegal-it might not be of so much importance. But that resolution was passed
that day -on the 15th:of August. On
the 16th Mr. O'Connor came to Manchester, and the question of putting forth
the address, becomes at this moment
extremely important. You have already
had detailed the imperfect history of it.
That began with James Leach, who
endeavoured to disclaim the placard that
was exhibited at his door, and called a
witness to prove that it was put there.
James Leach was one of the executive
committee. I proved that. I proved that
the executive committee consisted of five.
His Lordship has taken down their
names, and Leach is one. I asked the
man, who proved that executive placard was posted at Leach's door by
somebody else, if the posting-man went
into Leach's house, and he said no;
then it could not be he who deposited the other copy of the bill which was
found on Leach's counter. But why
did not Leach pull it down when he
came home and saw it staring him in the
face ? Is it nothing that he was president of the committee who issued that
placard ? Is it nothing that this copy
was put in his house, which copy the
posting-man could not put there?
.dDoes
Leach feel the force of that address?
does he think that he may arise, and, by
means of it, lash the people to madness,
and then divest himself of the responsibility, by saying-" the posting-man
put it there ?" Why, I say, you are
one of the executive; it purports to
co e from the executive; a copy of it
i
sted at your door, and another copy
is found in your house.
But where
did the proof-sheet come from ? Where
did the manuscript come from,? This
implicates another person who has not
appeared before us, though his plea is
on the record.
Mr. MURPHY :-I appear for him.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:We trace the original document from
place to place to M'Douall. The MS. is
burned; and if you tell me that the witness Cartledge is not to be believed then
I confirm him by the apprentice boys.

336
They tell where and how it came to them.
They confirm the story altogether, and
bring home to Leach and M'Douall that
Executive address. Then you have it
proved that the address was adopted by
When
the conference the next day.
Scholefield came in and announced Turner
the printer had been arrested, Mr. O'Connor immediately says-" Now that justifies what I said last night." What I said
last night. I dare say Mr. O'Connor did
not want to be bolder than the occasion
required; and you may remember one of
the expressions attributed to him was
this-" Don't use the word recommend;
merely use the word approve; it will be
more legal; it will better evade the law
in the event of the strike not turning as
we expect ;" which, after all, means this,
" I want to use language adequate to the
occasion, but with so much caution and
guard, that, in the event of the strike not
turning out as we wish, and the day of
reckoning should come before a jury, I
may have some little loop-hole to-creep out
at-something to offer- something to
mitigate the sense in which I used this
expression. Gentlemen, M'Douall, one
of the Executive, is proved by incontrovertible evidence to have concocted and
The copy is
corrected that address.
found at Leach's where it was taken. It
was there M'Douall was; it was there
the paper was taken and there the corrected copy was found in the handwriting
of M'Douall-SMr. O'CONNOR.-I do not wish to
interrupt the Attorney-General, but I beg
to refer to your Lordship's notes to know,
if, in the evidence given by Griffin or
Cartledge, any such observations were
made by me in reference to the Execi~e
address.
The JUDGE:-Somebody made the
observation.
Mr. O'CONNOR :-You will find,
my Lord, that Cartledge said, in conversation with Bairstow, when walking together on Monday, that I said something
in reference to that address.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I
am told that it is in Griffin's evidence.
THE JUDGE :-Cartledge is describing what takes place in the chapel. He
saw Mr. Scholefield there. He commu,nicated something to the chairman, who
then declared that Turner, the printer,

had been arrested. And then Mr. O'Connor said that justified his remarks last
night, and added something to the effect
that it was better to avoid such things if
they could.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL :
He
That is what Cartledge proved.
proved that at that meeting, when Turner's arrest was announced, Mr. O'Connor
said, "That proves what I said last night."
Where had I the means of proving that
there was a meeting on the night there
alluded to ? I had not the means of
proving that till to-day, it was proved by
young Scholefield, who said that on the
night of the 16th, there was a meeting
in the chapel, and that Mr. O'Connor
There were several persons
attended.
there. They came at seven o'clock and
Young Scholefield
remained till ten.
went to bed then, and how long they remained hlie does not know. Mr. O'Connor's statement to-day throws light on
what he was doing. I asked if the address appeared on Wednesday, and he
(Scholefield) said "No; he did not see
it till Thursday." I believe, in point of
fact, and so far as my evidence goes, that
placard, although in a state of publication, had not been put forth till after
that meeting of the night of the 16th.
Then comes the meeting of the next day.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-I do not wish to
interrupt the Attorney-General, but the
evidence, as your Lordship will find by
a reference to your notes, is this; that
the MS. was in the printer's hands at
ten, and that whoever sent it could net
wait to correct it; and that it was out
the next day between five and six.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Yes, but whether it was out of the printer's hands and before the public, I don't
know. Whether it was mooted and discussed at the meeting on the night of the
16th, or not, this is certain, that Mr. 0'
Connor says, in reference to it, the next
day-" That justifies the remark I madelast night." I find that the testimony of
Cartledge and others on this point has
been alluded to. Gentlemen, I don't
stop to justify the violation of any promise that has been made in an honest
cause. The defendants have called Witnesses-they have no excuse for not calling more. Johnson is acquitted, Wilde
is acquitted, Allinson is acquitted. Where

337
was another reporter at the conference be- clubs, to the savings' banks, and all banks
sides Griffin, and if what passed there is for gold! gold ! gold !" That was iswhat can be avowed--what you and the sued on the 15th. Then says Scholepublic should approve of, why don't we field, :" spare me; I yielded to the
get it. " 0," said Mr. O'Connor," why authority of the magistrates. I put off
don't you put Griffin's notes in evidence ?" the meeting at my chapel. Nothing -of
I tell you, gentlemen; I wanted from the kind was to take place.
It was
Griffin nothing but the documents. I did stopped by public advertisement." And
niot want their speeches. I wanted but says Mr.. O'Connor and the rest of the
the resolutions and address which I found persons with him; " 0 spare us; we
in the Northern Star-nothing more. met; we were at Mr. Scholefield's chaIf you do not choose to get it from Grif- pel in Manchester.
We met there to
fin in cross-examination, do not complain heal our differences, to organize our sothat I did not make his notes evidence. ciety, and to commemorate'Hunt's moWhen I put him into the box, if you nument." Was there a syllable uttered
knew what he proved at Manchester, or about healing differences ? Was there
if he stated what was not true, there was one word about organizing the body, and
another reporter at the conference and making it sore legal ? Was there a word
why not call him ? If the character of thf about Hunt's inument ? No; " They
meeting was misrepresented, why not met in conclave; for several hours, every
call this person ? There were forty at the man stated the views of his constituency
conference; they are not all in the in- and the state of his district."-The views
dictment, and why are they not called ? of his constituency, and the state of his
Mr. O'CONNOR:-The other re- district ! Gentlemen, I here do say,
porter is a defendant.
that I considdl" that meeting---calling
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:themselves a meeting of delegates to reWilliam Hill is the other reporter, and present districts, and the organ of the
he being indicted they could not call him. opinions of the people of Erigland-I
But, after all, my remark is this; it is pronounce that, so far as Ihave any
made a matter of complaint that I did judgment, to be in itself illegal. -,No
not give evidence of Griffin's notes. But man has a right to assume to himself
ifI had done so I should then be asked, any political function unknowi to the
" Why not confine yourself to documents constitution. No set of persons have a
that cannot deceive ?" But I have strip- right, in defiance of the sovereign's
ped Mr. O'Connor of that topic of re- power, to create corporatibns. No set of
3mark;
I have deprived him of that persons have a right to act as a coropportunity of complaining by confining
him to the evidence of documents where porate body, without the sanction of
the sovereign's Charter; nor have any
he cannot be deceived. This is the case. persons a right to act as delegates
Let us see what is the state of MancheS- for any political purpose or other, in a
ter when the delegates assembled in con- manner unknown to the constitution.
ference at Scholefield's chapel on the I state it briefly Iand 'fearlessly. I think
17th of August. That placard was I am called upon to do so. The meetprinted on Monday the 15th-" Run for ing itself was illegal. Well, then I' am
gold; labour is suspended ;, public credit told, why don't you stop such a meeting,
is shaken; paper is worthless." Good and such another meeting like it ? Why,
God, gentlemen, I cannot but be ad- gentlemen, it is perfectly true that I made
dressing persons in that box who are ac- the remark alluded to, at' Monmouth, on
quainted with what the effect of that the occasion of Frost's trial, and I am
might be if there was a syllable of truth nQt at any time unprepared to make it
in it. It is not an uncommon thing again when the occasion may call for it.
for a report to become true by the mis- There are periods when you cannot carry
chievous consequences of its own propa- out the strict letter of the law to the last
gation. "Run for gold, every sovereign point of legal exactness and severity; and
is now worth thirty shillings. Paper can- it may bp that ai assembily of persons
not be cashed. Run, middle classmen, was permitted at one tinie to sit cheek
trades, odd fellows, sick clubs, money by jowl with the I-IHuse of Commons,

38
beartding them, and discussing public
questions and public measures side by
side with the House of Commons. In
my humble judgment, that meeting was
perfectly illegal; it was sanctioned by no
constitutional authority. Every man has
a right, to act for himself in this free
country; he hasaright fearlessly to express
his opinions upon all subjects c6nnected
with his rights,-dealing with those rights
in a legal and proper manner, and subject
to the question, whether he is abusing, or
rightly using, the privilege of speech,every man has a right to petition; but no
man has a right to create a political
organ, of which the constitution knows
nothing; no man has a right to constitute himself a delegate, o reatd delegates
to meet other delegates, ina sort of convention, and to have a sort of imperium
in imperio in this state; and great danger must ensue from its being supposed
that a meeting of this sort can take place
without a violation of the law. There
were delegates assembled in Manchester;
and what did they do P They passed a
resolution. It was assented to in a mitigated shape. An amendment was moved,
and that amendment was overruled.
There was an understanding that the decision of the majority should bind the
minority. I do not rest merely on the
verbal evidence. The address was unanimously carried. I will presently call
your attention to the language of that
address, and to some of the passages that
are to be found in it. What is the language
of the meeting ? What is it that Cooper
says ? I will say a word or two on what
Cooper says on another occasion, by way
of testing the sincerity of those principles which to day we are called on to respect. If my memory fails me not, Cooper
" For my part I am ready for
saidthe worst; the ShakspeariansofLeicester
are prepared to fight." Gentlemen, it is
for you to consider whether it be true, but,
if it be true, what is the conclusion to
which you should come ? The puerile
comments on the phraseology of the address about the God of battle-(and to
this address I shall presently allude) are
cattered in one moment, as soon as ydu
hear Cooper in the meeting at which he
referred to that address with approbation:
-" I am prepared for the worst," said he,

" the Sbakspearians of Leicester are prepared to fight." AsThe JUDGE:-He stated that the
Shakspearian Chartists of Leicester
were determined to have the Charter, and
that as for his part he was determined to
fight for the liberties of the people.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL: " As for his part he was determined to
fight for the liberties of the people."
Why, gentlemen, that is a better commentary on the " God of justice and of
battle," than that suggested by my learned
and pious friend Dundas; or that suggested by some of the defendants, who
said it was taken out of our much admired
liturgy. Here is the resolution of the
conference delegates:" That whilst the Chartist body did not originate the present cessation from labour, this conference of delegates from various parts of England, express their deep sympathy with their constituents, the working men now on strike; and
that we strongly approve the extension and the
continuance of their present struggle till the
People's Charter becomes a legislative enactment, and decide forthwith to issue an address
to that effect; and pledge ourselves, on our return to our respective localities, to give a proper
direction to the people's efforts."

The amendment that might have mitigated that, found but a few supporters,
and they were out-voted. The conference
also adopted an address, and the Executive committee are referred to in that
address:"Brothers, these are not times to hesitate!
The corn has a golden hue while your visages
are pale, but hope for change and better times.
We are fortunate in having an accredited executive, bearing the confidence of all, at our head."
"They, too, have called upon you. You will
read their address: it breathes a bold and manly
spirit.

I have shewn you who the Executive
were; James Leach, M'Douall, Campbell, Bairstow, and Morgan Williams.
The last mentioned is not before you.
"It breathes a bold and manly spirit"" Why," says Mr. O'Connor, " if you
were to speak of a crime, as being a bold,
and manly and daring act, would that
make you a party to it ? It might or it
might not. I can well understand an occasion where, if you did speak of a crime
in those terms, especially the crime of trea-

839
son, it would make you an accessory after the fact. If you were associating
with, and harbouring, persons who did
some bold act of treason, you would be
considered a party to the crime. " We
are fortunate in having an accredited
Executive, bearing the confidence of all,
at our head.
They too, have called
upon you. You will read their address;
it breathes a bold and manly spirit. We
could not, in times like the present, withhold from them, your servants, our cordial support"-(that is the i ecutive
who published this address)-" as in
union alone is security to be found, and
from unanimity alone, can success be expected." Gentlemen, Mr. O'Connor has
alluded to the Chartist trials at Monmouth. I stood side by side with Mr.
O'Connor watching the event of that
proceeding. Mr. O'Connor was there
acting on behalf of the unfortunate persons implicated in that charge. To me,
indeed, Mr. O'Connor mightenot have
produced much of the evidence that he has
brought forward to-day to prove that he
is a person of warm and humane feeling,
of active benevolence, and of the kindliest nature. I bear of him that willing
testimony.
You yourselves may have
seen how, when Pilling was telling his
story of distress, Mr. O'Connor melted
over those woes that he had not participated in.
I believe that when Mr.
O'Connor came to Manchester he did
not intend to publish that address; but
I say that, whether, seeing from the prospect before him, that the time was now
ripe for joining in something like a general movement to carry the Charter; or,
whether he was carried away by others
against his better judgment, in the stream
of opinion, I know not. I do not accuse
Mr. O'Connor of going down to Manchester for that purpose; but I do accuse
him of this ;-of knowing what that
Executive Address was, and, possibly
against his better judgment, joining in
expressions in that address, in the resolution, and in the Executive Placard, of
the meaning of which you will have,
presently, to judge altogether for yourselves. Gentlemen, I may, perhaps, owe
to, his Lordship, and to you, some apology
for what I have said with respect to Mr.
O'Connor; but I owe it to truth, and I
have ever fearlessly proclaimed what I

believe to be the truth, with respect to any
man whose conduct I had occasion to
speak of. I have never suppressed, under
any circumstances, that which I thought
might be advantageous, even to those
whom I was called upon to prosecute.
But I do say, gentlemen, notwithstanding
what I have stated, that I believe, after
hearing the evidence, and knowing what
I do know,-[ believe that Mr. O'Connor
came down with no intention of joining
that movement. But whether he was
carried away, as I said, by the opinions
of others, or thinking that the time was
come for such a movement,-I do charge
him with publishing this Executive Address, this resolution, and the address of
the Chartiyt delegates. I charge him with
doing that for the purpose of inducing those
who were then out on strike to continue
the measures they were adopting, for the
purpose of carrying the Charter. But
then I am told about the words "peace,
law and order."
Gentlemen, on this
subject I think Mr. O'Connor and the
Chartists have made a great mistake in
point of law-I may almost say in point
of fact. They seem to think, that, provided no bones
are broken, peace,
law and order, are preserved. Their
notion seems to be that if 5,000 people
march to a mill, and present their
physical intimidation, bludgeons, &e.,
and with threats upon their brow; then,
provided the parties go out, without
being forced out, it seems to be the
opinion of those defendants that that is
no violation of the law. They fancy
that physical intimidation is moral
force. They say they do no mischief;
but they go in such large numbers that no effectual resistance can be
offered, and then they say-" Don't
break windows or heads." Now, subject. to correction from his Lordship, I
don't hesitate to pronounce this to be
as great a mistake, both in point of fact
and in point of law, as can be made.
It is not necessary that you should have
evidence of the pulling down and the
burning of mills-it is not necessary
that they should have proceeded to such
lengths as would make the country unsafe to live in; any set of men (his
Lordship will tell you whether I am
laying down the law correctly,) who may
go in such numbers, as to make their

340
request an irresistible demand, are not
conducting themselves consistently with
peace, law, and order. Now, of this
mistake I will give you one specimen.
Evidence was given that some people
were at work. I think they were doing
some bricklaying work, and some men
came up and said-" you are working,
you must not go on with the work."
The man said-" I mean to go on if I
can; I must not give up at your
bidding." So away they went and got
another "lot"-I believe that was the
expression- and then they stopped.
" Well," said the defendant Woodruffe,
in cross-examining the witness with the
simplicity of a person falling into the
error- (the riot act was read mind,)"cWell," said Woodruffe to ~e witness
Maiden, " was any body hurt ?" "No,"
said the witness. " Was any property
destroyed " " No." That is their notion of peace, law, and order. Provided
you do not destroy life, inflict some bodily
injury, or destroy property, they have a
notion that peace, law, and order, are
preserved, and that nobody has a right
to complain. I have read to you, gentlemen, the only passages of the address,
and of the resolution, that I think it necessary now to call your attention to:
but the placard itself has been the subject
of a great deal of comment. I do not
mean to go through it in the elaborate
manner in which my learned friend Dundas has done, who commented upon it
sentence by sentence. What do you
think, gentlemen, of this, " Englishmen! the blood of your brothers reddens the streets of Preston and
Blackburn," (in the smaller copy,,Halifax is put in) "and the murderers
thirst for more." Now, this was too
strong for my learned friend Dundas.
None of the defendants thought proper
to comment on this. My learned friend
Dundas felt bound to do so. But, says
my learned friend, it was wrong to call
them 'murderers.' Well, you will find
that with reference to that very event, one
of the expressions used is, that English.
men had been murdered while they were
peacefully agitating. As if surrounding
the constituted authorities at Preston, and
the military who were assisting them, as
if surrounding them by a mob in front
and rear and from parrallel street, throwing

stones over the houses before and behind
-as if that was a peaceful agitation of
the Charter.
" Be firm, be courageous, be men. Peace,
law, and order, have prevailed on our side, let
them be revered until our brethren in Scotland,
Wales, and Ireland, are informed of your
resolution; and when a universal holiday prevails, which will be the case in eight days,
of what use will bayonets be against public
opinion ?"

That is overpowering the constituted
authorities of the country by intimidation
-that is public opinion.
"What tyrant can then live above the terrible
tide of thought and energy, which is now flowing
fast, under the guidance of man's intellect, which
is now destined by a Creator to elevate his people above the reach of want, the rancour of despotism, and the penalties of bondage ?"
" The trades, a noble, patriotic band, have
taken the lead in declaring for the Charter, and
drawing their gold from the keeping of tyrants.
Follow their example, lend no whip to rulers
wherewith to scourge you. Countrymen and
brothers, centuries may roll on, as they have
fleeted past, before such. universal action may
again be displayed. We have made the cast for
liberty, and we must stand like men the hazard
of the die. Let none despond. Let all be cool
and watchful, and like the bridesmaids in the
parable, keep your lamps burning, and let your
continued resolution be a beacon to guide those
who are now hastening far and wide to follow
your memorable example. Brethren, we rely
on your firmness; cowardice, treachery and
womanly fear, would cast our cause back for
half a century. Let no man or child break down
the solemn pledge, and if they do, may the curse
of the poor and the starving pursue them-they
deserve slavery who would madly court it.Our machinery is all arranged, and your cause
will in three days be impelled onward by all the
intellect we can summon to its aid; therefore,
whilst you are peaceful, be firm, and whilst you
look to the law, remember that you had no voice
in making it, and are, therefore, the slaves to the
will, thelaw, and the caprice of your masters. All
officers of the Association are called upon to aid
and assist in the peaceful extension of the movement, and to forward all monies for the use of
delegates who may be expressed over the
country. Strengthen our hands at this crisis.
Support your leaders. Rally round our sacred
cause, and leave the decision to the God of
Justice and of Battle."

341
Now, gentlemen, the very identical
newspaper in which this address and this
resolution are contained, and this reference to the Executive placard was made,
contains a passage which was read on
behalf of the defendants for the purpose
of shewing what was the meaning ofpeace,
law, and order. Your Lordship has a
copy of the paper.
The JUDGE :-Yes, I have got a copy
of the third edition. I will now turn to
the passage to which Mr. O'Connor referred.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-I
will hand up a copy to your Lordship of
the paper. I think you will find the
passage referred to on the eighth page.
FROM OUR THIRD EDITION OF LAST WEEK.

"FURTHER PROGRESS.
" Northern Star Office,
" Saturday Morning, Two o'Clock.
" When the wicked bend their bow, they not
unfrequently shoot beyond the mark they aimed
at. We to-day dispatched our own reporter
into the disturbed districts, to learn the real
state of matters up to the latest moment; and
from his statement, which we subjoin, the League
men appear to have done so in this instance.
Their object, doubtless, in the forcing on and
sustaining of this preconcerted strike, was to
confine it to the adjuncts of machinery in mills
and factories. We imagine that their purpose
extended not further than the lightening of their
present heavy stock of manufactured goods by a
temporary cessation of productive power in that
particular department; while they might make it
also serve the purpose of verifying their statements of the people's discontent and their predictions of "risings and riotings" for food; and
so of procuring for them another " Extension of
Commerce" for the keeping up of the golden
showers to which they have become so habituated
that they take badly to a change of weather:
while, as we have already said, their further object was to make it also a weapon against Chartism. They have over.reached themselves! The
wicked are taken in their own snare! and the
sham-Chartist League strike seems, from our reporter's statement, to have become a Chartist strike
in good earnest, so far as Manchester, at least,
is concerned. The trades generally have now followed out the mill hands. They appreciate the
kind feeling of their League friends in forcing
out their brethren; they think what is good for
some must be good for all; and so have turned
out for company. While they reason, truly and
like statesmen, that their efforts might as well
point to a primary as to a secondary benefit; that

there is little use in obtaining an advantage of
which they may again be deprived to-morrow;
and that therefore the thing in which they are
most interested is not so much the prevention of
the present reduction, nor even the obtaining a
present advance in wages, as the securing of that
political power of self-protection which may enable them to bring their labour to the market free
from the iniquitous and oppressive disadvantages
which now beat down its value. This is a glorious conclusion. It is a point worth struggling
for; worth suffering for; worth passing through
some risk and hazard for; because, once gained,
it cannot fail to compensate.
" Our opinion on the means now used for its
attainment by the trades of Manchester was registered three years ago. That opinion has undergone no change. A cessation from labour, to
be effectual to the carrying any political object,
must be national and simultaneous: it cannot
then fail to be successful, because it indicates the
nation's will, against which, in its full strength,
whether positively, or thus negatively, manifested, no power can stand; but a mere sectional
display of this most decisive of all forms
of moral force, like a mere sectional display of
physical resistance, is sure to be overpowered by
the strength of faction, consisting in its immense
wealth and its organized physical resources."
Now, gentlemen, this is read for the purpose of explaining the intention of the Executive address, the address to the Chartist body, and the resolution. What is
the meaning of this ? Does it not mean,
" Don't destroy property, don't destroy
life, but don't let the people work : stop
the mills, make it national: go about
with your large numbers, and request the
people, and if they see you strong enough
they will attend to your request."
"If then the strike is to be a Chartist strike,
it must become universal: not merely Manchester, but every town in England, Wales, and
Scotland, must at once-as one man and with one
voice-declare the purpose of the people to b'
free; and such a declaration will be to thosk
whom it concerns the fiat of omnipotence. But
if Manchester, or even Lancashire, sustain the
struggle singly, it will be unsuccesful, and, in all
probability, retard the movement it was meant
to hasten."
I will read another passage from page
This really is the
five, column three.
very life and soul of the question. Now,
gentlemen, just listen to this for a moment.

z

3z2
a right to work or notto wok, but they have

CHORLEY.

o

right to break windows, destroy propertyp or blun
i About 8000 people enteredChofley, yesterday, factories.
"Above all things, they have no right to insult
about eleven o'clock in the forenoon, principally
colliers by trade, and succeeded in stopping all annoy, or fight with the police force or the sol.
the works in less than two hours. A great num- diery. Every hellish invention will be practised
ber have gone to Preston this morning. All the to induce them to do this: let the bridle be kept
off*Mieir tempers and evre on their
works are at a stand to-day ; none have dared to tightly
tongues: let them even patiently bear annoyauce,
start their mills, with the exception of Medcaff,
the manager for the estate of Dobson. A public insult and indignity; resenting them only by the
meeting took place last'night, and a resolution calmness of a manly contempt, the offspring of
was psssed to have the Charter the law of the a lofty purpose not to be turned aside.
land before they worked again."AUGUST 17.

Mrb O'CONNOR.--I am sure, the ment that it is so now. That the people laugh
Attorney-General does not mean to con- at all efforts to bring them into collision with
vey any mistake; the other was a lead- the soldiery. Right thankful are we that our
often and again reiterated lessons of forbearance
ing article-this is correspondence.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : - have been thus appreciated, even by a starving
This is a statement of what was going people, goaded as they are. Let but this spirit
on, which serves as a proof that the editor be still manifested; the "risings and the riots"
and proprietor of this paper knew what left to to the infernal hatchers of the plot; the
was going on. He knew it, for it is calm determination of the people held up to its
in the same paper which contains this point; the enemy disarmed by peacefulness;
and -the strike becomes universal- England,
advice.
Mr. HILL :-The latter part of the Wales, and Scotland presenting at the same moleading article, I presume, was not read ment one workless workshop-while the dogs
it is materially connected with, and ex- of war have no pretence to tear; and the fiends
planatory of, the preceding part wfiichl of faction will soon " scratch their heads," and
the Attorney-General has now read, and knowing such an " asking" to be equivalent to
should in all fairness come h'fore the Staking," will give the Charter in a trice, and
jury.
thankful to be thus let off.
The JUDGE :-, wish you to mark
But mind ! to be thus effective it must be
passages considered of importance, as
been read before; for universal. The olling of the oppans waters bears
they have not
otherwise I shall have considerable diffi- away the dam upon which, though running in
the same direction, the rivulet makes no impres.
culty in distinguishing them.
sion. and the stream expends its force in vain.
The ATTORNEY.GENERAL
"Let nothing, therefore, be done hastily. By
I entreat of you, gentlemen, to read the
and without due
of that leading article which Mr. hastily we mean thoughtlessly,
whole
consideration.
Hill has adverted to, and, if he can find
' The attempt, and not the deed
anything in it but the meaning which I
Destroys us.'
out, in the name of justice give
pointed
"If the people are prepared to carry out a naMr. O'Connor the benefit of it. The retional strike let them do so: but let them not
mainder of the article was then read.
" Let the country see to this; the men
of Lancashire have done nobly; let their brethren throughout the empire arouse; let them
speak out at once, like men, and say, 'Yestor
'No,' to the great question of 'shall we now
strike for the Charter ?' No higgling-no hesitatation-no waiting :'If, when done, 'twere well done,
Then, 'twere well it were done quickly.'
"Neve', however, for one moment let it be
forgotten by any Chartist, that to be successful
they must be peaceful. They have a right to
strike, but they have no right to riot. They have

attempt it without first knowing that they can
carry it out. The vauntings and boastings of a
few thousands of too-zealous men; the passing
of resolutions declaratory of their intention never to return to work until the Charter becomes
law; and then the failure of all this for want of
due support; and the finish of the whole by the
' going in' of these parties, without the Charter,
and without any other practical advantage, probably to the great disadvantage of many of
them, would have a great tendency to dispirit
the people; to damp their ardour in the move-

343
meat; and to throw seriously back the Charter
agitation. This, no true patriot could desire:
and yet from all the circumstances that we are
able to see of the whole case, we fear that this
will be just the effect of a perseverance in the
present movement. We see no chance of its
becoming national. There has been no concert,
save amongst the rascals of the League. There
is to brganization for it. There are no means
upon which for the different sections of the
people to fall back for sustenance, while the
flame spreads through the land. And it seems
almost unnatural to expect that the corrupt tree
of Anti-corn-law League plottery should produce
any fruit so wholesome as the bending of the
whole energies of the whole people at one time
towards one point; and again we repeat, that
unless that be so, the whole will be, as far as
Chartism is concerned, a miserable failure, and
do us much harm. There is no power in any
section of the country to remain out for any
length of time, without coming in contact with
the law. The people must have food. If a
general cessation of labour in any given district
be kept up for a considerable length of time, a
great portion of the people of that district must
obtain food by means which will bring them
into collision with the authorities; and this
must end in the infliction upon many of them
of at least a much greater amount of destitution
and suffering than they before endured; to say
nothing of all the proscriptions, the imprisonmients, the transportings, and, perhaps, the
hangings; nothing of all the shootings and
saberings, to which it may be a prelude. An
universal strike would be free from these risks;
for its very appearance and existence would at
once paralyse the arm of power, and sicken the
heart of faction: while a sectional one. of
almost whatever magnitude, could only, and
certainly would only, be productive of the evils
we have just described.
"Dearly, therefore, as we should love to see
the millions with one shout throw down their
tools, and throw up their hands, and fold up
their armns, while fhetion stood, as she would
then stand, amazed, dismayed and powerless,
we yet fear that this will not now be the case;
and, therefore, we regret that the Charter movement should have been at all mixed up with the
strike. We fear that it will eventually be found
to have only served the purpose of the enemy.
Lothe would we be to damp the ardour, to the
slightest extent, of any of our friends; but we

should be still store lothe to permit them un.
wittingly to harm the cause without warning.
We pretend not to infallibility of judgment;
we presume not to dictate a course of action.
The people will determine on their own course;
but' they have a right to our opinion, and while
we have power of wielding tongue or pen, they
shall always have it honestly, without fear or
favour. We have, then, on this matter, given
our opinion. Let the people give it its own
value. They will weigh well the-whole circumstances, and determine for themselves upon the
question of STATiE or fO STRIKE: but if th

strike is to be for the Charter, let it be national,
and let it be simultaneous; not progressing
slowly, but at once bringing out every place;
or let it not be attempted. Let the Leaguers
who have attempted the reduction, be battled
singly by the people of their districts; and
made to feel that a single Leaguer is as power.
less against a large section of the people, as a
section of the people is against all the force of
faction. Thus will the strike return to its
original character, and be productive, if not of
benefit, at least of less maisehief than we apprehend from it should it remain sectional, and yet
tend politically. The question is one of the
highest importance and greatest delicacy that
the people can entertain. Let it not be entertained thoughtlessly! Let them bring to it
deep consideration and expansive views; taking
in the whole range of circumstances,

effects,

and consequences; and God speed them in their
efforts for Right!"
If you
by certain
something
what were

want to know what is meant
expressions, you must enquire
more about them than merely
the words used.

BINGLEY.
Several thousands left Bradford early on Tuesday morning, and proceeded towards Shipley,
where they stoppedall the mills without difficulty,
there being no protective force. From thence
they marched on to Bingley, where they commenced their work of putting a stop to all business. While the Skipton mail was passing
through, all persons got on that could find room,
and rode on to Keighley.
WEDNESDAY.

Everything is quite at a stand still, and nothing is to be seen but the families of the turnouts who are parading the streets.

Why ? There being
force.

no protective

344

TAFFORD.
WEDNESDAY

NIGHT.

How matters will terminate it is impossible for
one to tell. This part of the country is in an
awful state of excitement. On Monday last, all
the shops in this town were shut up, and great
excitement prevailed in consequence of a report
that the colliers " were coming." Three hundred additional specials were immediately sworn
in. The 12th foot were removed from this town
this morning for the Isle of France, and were
replaced by two troops of the 34th. If matters
do not assume a different aspect soon, the whole
of the Stafford trade will be at a stand-still, as
it depends entirely on the Pottery and the
northern districts, indeed many of the manufacturers are already talking of stopping their
shops."
sSKIPTON.
Several thousands visited this quiet town on
Tuesday, from Colne and other parts, and stopped
the mills. The town remained quiet on Wednesday. On Tuesday, the special constables captured, with the assistance of a few of the military,
six of the turn-outs, who were committed to
York. Mr. Garforth, one of the magistrates,
was, we understand, much injured."
A witness was called to day for the
defence, who stated that he went from
Burnley to Colne, and held meetings
there, at which there were from 15000 to
20000 persons present; and that he did
so in order to " quiet the neighbourhood."
" KEIGHLEY.
" Great excitement prevailed here on Monday.
Several thousand turn. outs poured into the town
between ten and eleven o'clock, and proceeded
to stop all the mills. Every precaution was
taken by the magistrates, who issued a proclamation requesting all peaceable inhabitants to
keep within doors, and swore in upwards of 400
constables, but for whose services there were
not much occasibn, not. being backed by any
military, who were all engaged in the neighbouring large towns."
"POTTERIES.
SHELTON AND HANLEY.
TUESDAY, TWELVE O'CLOCK.

"I have just heard that the military stationed
at Burslem have begun firing on the people, and
that two men have been killed, one from Stokeupon-Trent, and the other from either Macclesfield or Congleton; but reports are so rife at
the present hour, that the extent of the loss of

life cannot be told. I also hear that numbers are
wounded, but how great a number I cannot say,
thus proving that the ruling few are determined,
at all hazards, to perpetuate their rule over the.
sons of labour. Where these things will end L
cannot say, but this I do say, that neither life
nor property is now safe in these districts. L
would just make one remark before I close this,,
that, as a body, the Chartists have had no hand,
in the destruction of property that has been~
going on here, nor has the advice of the Chartist speakers been attended to, for, had that
been the case, I can affirm that no such thing
as loss, either of property or life, could ever
have occurred.
"AUGUST 17TH.
"I resume my narrative from where I left off
in my report of yesterday, I perceive that I
omitted to state that the residence of the Rev.
R. E. Aitkins was set on fire sometime about
two o'clock A. M., and what makes this worse,
the Rev. gentleman was a complete invalid, and
report says that the state of excitement into
which he was thrown, has terminated fatally,
but this I cannot say that I positively know,
nor can I rely on hearsay tales. I have also to
report that the elegant mansion of W. Parker,
Esq., has shared the same fate, and nothing is
to be seen but a heap of ruins at either of those
places.
" A public meeting was suddenly called by
the influentials of Hanley and Shelton, to devise
the best means of relieving the distresses of
the inhabitants of this once flourishing district.
This meeting was addressed by Mr. Moses
Simpson, W. Ridgway, Esq., Mr. John Richards,
and Mr. Wm. Ellis, from Burslem. Much good
speaking was the result, but just as the meeting
was about to come to some definite conclusion,
the arrival of a body of military put a stop to any
further proceedings; but not before the Chartists
had passed a vote for the whole Charter. Mr.
Ridgway earnestly requested the meeting to stand.
firm, as it was a legal public meeting, conducting
itself in a peaceable mannet, and that the military had no right to interfere. A magistrate
was with the military, (I hear a Rev.) and he, in
true character, ordered the meetinig to be dispersed, which was done. The Rev. Gentleman
then read the Riot Act, and gave strict orders
that all persons found in the streets should be arrested.
I have also omitted to state, that there are
pawnshops in the townships of Hanley and Shelton, and a number of persons of both sexes, but
mostly females, surrounded the pawn-brokers,

345
demanding the goods which they had pledged,
and though several persons addressed them,
urging that it would be unjust inthem to take
back by force what they had pledged unless they
paid the money they had on those goods, yet the
women would have no nay: their clothes they
would have, and being emboldened by considerable numbers, forced their way into the pawnshops and served themselves, getting not their
,own property but anything that came to their
hands, and taking many things belonging to other
-persons. This morning I witnessed a spring cart
:full of females, guarded by both horse and foot,
taken to Newcastle; and some men on foot, between the sections of infantry, were likewise
taken to the same place, for examination before
the magistrates, and no doubt but most of them
be
,will committed for trial at the next sessions.
" In my last I stated that two men were killed
at Burs em, it is now certain that one was shot
dead, the other, though very seriously wounded,
may still recover; his name is Jerrold, a bricklayer, at Stoke-upon-Trent.

"i town is competely in the hands of the
The
turn-outs-all peaceable."
Is that the
All peaceable, gentlemen
stae
ea nt een
peac
peace that is meant by the words "peace,
law aid order," whieh you find on the
Executive Placard? All peaceable! Yes,
way.
" The town is completely in the hands of the
turn-outs-all peaceable. But I am afraid if
any interruption be offered it will not be for long,
as they appear determined to have their object
I do not think it necessary, my Lord,
to read more of this. I have called your
attention to, I think, six or seven paragraphs, which I have marked, but, gentlemen, take the whole paper and read it
for yourselves, and say whether you believe that the words "peace, law and
order," do really mean peace, the protec-

of
Now, you will judge for yourselves tion of the law, and the preservation
what could be the meaning of these words order, such as every man in this country
The God ofbattle,"'and this allusion to has a right to demand from those that
--the inutility of bayonets, which I read from govern the land, and from the authorities
in. But
the paper itself. It is mockery to tell us of the country, to protect him
that this was a mere tribute of adoration there is another paragraph which I canto the God who governs all events; a not help calling your attention to. Here
is
mere expression, as Mr. Dundas has it, a paragraph by one Thomas Cooper.

Against him it is no evidence; but it is
evidence against the proprietor and editor
of the paper. I beg to call your attention to the heartless, hypocritical, sneering tone he has adopted. Cooper is supposed to say that he went on to Stafford:
" I found matters in a somewhat critical
condition in this Tory-ridden borough. Mason,
DEWSBURY.
WEDNESDAY NIGHT. and his companions in tribuation, are confined
" returned to town ; there the turn-outs are
ust While I am now writing, cannot be less than ia the gaol here: one hundred and fifty- colliers
ad
be less
justwenty thousand-;all sobther,se annot than ht- been also lodged in it within the weektwenty thousand-all sober steady, straigh- troops of soldiers had been marched into the
forward men,-who apparently seem more de- town-additional rooms were being built to the
termined than ever for the general stand. They gaol-cannon, it was said, was to be planted upon
have been round to Ossett, Horbury, Healey, the extreme towers-and everything looked so
a
Middletown, and Thornhill, where they have threatening, that when the friends here took
my lecture, he
stopped all hands without the least interruptio . bill to the printer, announcing
Great fears were enter"The authorities have been sitting all day did not dare to print it.
would be apprehended if I Howin any body they could for special con- tand that Ithe market-place that night. dared to
swearing
stand up in
stables.,
o'clock had struck, there I was
s The millowners of Batley have compelled ever, when seven
-mounted on a famous long bench, procured by
their men lobesofiateciaveo
of police then
their men to be sworn in as specials, so as they the friends. The superintendent
can commence work in the morning : but, as far took his station close by my right elbow, the
windows to
as I can learn, the assembled turn-outs in the tory gentry and ladies threw up their
listen and hear the rebel Chartist commit himtown are determined to resist it.
to
"' the great Being who decides contests
of the strong," and means nothing. Gentlemen, what was it calculated to produce ? I will tell you what it did produce. In page eight of the same paper
in which the explanatory leading article
is, you have this statement:

346

*0l and to se his pounwd4 upon and borne Padibam, Skipton, Blackburn and Pres.
away in the dirty claws of the raw lobsters. But ton.
no i I shewed how excellent it was to have a
" Sweet little silver-voiced lady,"
and pay our million and a quarter yearly to sup-

port herself and her establishment.

But what was the effect of the

placard ? Why, all the places in which
considerable violence occurred, the damage was done after the publication of

I demon- the placard.

Shipley's case was after

strated that loyal Chartists knew the land would the placard.
be ruined if the civil list were not kept up ? and
Mr.O'CONNOR:-That was on the
that working men would all weep their eyes sore I0th of August.
if Adelaide were to be bereft of her £100,000
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:-It
a-year. I denounced any ragged shoemaker was on the 26th or 30th. Cooper's was
(Stafford, like Northampton, you know, my on the 24th. There were several other
brave Shakspeareans, is a famous shoemaking acts of violence committed as the effect
town,) as a stupid fellow if he dared to talk about of the publication of that placard. It
his aged grandmother being in a bastile and ve- was idustpulic
at plc
getating on skilly, while the Dowager had three was industriously circulated over the counpalaces to live in. The satire completely blunted try. By whom ? By those who put it
the talons of the blue-bottle; his hard face re- forth. There was none else to do it. It
laxed, his teeth separated, and at length he did great mischief. It altered the tone
grinned outright, while the host of shopmates and general conduct of the turn-outs;
and they conducted themselves nut with
burst into laughter.
Well-what was to be done ? I could not be the same respect for property and life,
taken up for treason, for my words"-[Words, and feeling as they did before. I beg,
words, words, said the Attorney-General.] gentlemen, now to call your attention to
"were ultra-loyal, with a witness! Three villain- another paragraph which I have read
ous red-coats, standing in the crowd, soon solved from that paper, as explaining the meaning of the terms " peace, law, and order."
the difficulty."
of the hypocri- These words meant-"Alarm, terrify, inThat is an instance
tical purposes for which certain language timidate; go in such numbers as to be
can be adopted. Now, gentlemen, ]1 irresistible, but do not, destroy property,
have a word or two to say upon the result for that may bring you within the yenof this trial. I have taken some pains geance of the law. Property is protected
Doa't destroy
with the evidence, and I want to state to by acts of parliament.
ou the effect of it. The Executive it; but go and intimidate as much as
Placard was got out of the printer's you please." But, gentlemen, have you
hands on the evening of the 16th, but not eidence that affects every body who
does
.it not appear to have been very much was present at that conference meeting?
abroad in Manchester till after the 17th. You will find that, in the first place,
.Now I beg to tell you the names of the Thomas Mahon was there.
The JUDGE :- There were only
places where that paper was made a rallying watch-word, not of what I call peace, twenty-three proved.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL :law, and order, but of violence: Manchester, Stockport, Hyde, Mottram, Old- Mahon's name does not occur in the list
ham, Royton, Todmorden, Rochdale, derived from either Cartlei.ge or Griffin.
Burnley, Bacup, and Blackburn; eleven But in the evidence given at one of the
places in all. In every one of those meetings, it is stated that Mahon was
places, a copy of that resolution appeared. elected to attend the conference, and was
Let us see the effect of it. Before the going.
Mr. O'CONNOR :- That was the
march on Manchester the stopping of the
mills had been comparatively at a few trades' delegates meeting, my Lord.
The ATTORNEY - GENERAL:places, but, from the 9th of August, you
will find most of the acts of violence oc- No, my Lord, he was chosen as a deleThe attack on the Stockport gate to the convention at Manchester.
curred.
workhouse was after that-I think on the But, if there be any doubt about Mahon,
1 th. Acts of violence were also comn- I will proceed to another-John Leach
mitted after that act in Mottram, Woolly- of Hyde. Now he was at meetings of
bridge, Broad bottom, Glossop, Todmor- the 1st, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th, of August.
den, Robchdale, Burnley, Haslingden, On ithe 12thi he was at Hyde; on the

Z,47

13th at -. talybrindge;;on the:5th-at th

there was a meeting at his chapel on the
tradces! delegates meeti'ng,. and oa the 17th- night, of the16th,whichMeetinglasted
at the convention at Manchester.,Gen- several hours. This we got fromyoung
t:lemen, these, men werecognizantof' Scholefleld. I find. that thesiNvas a meetwhat was going on; even if theydid.not ing the next day in the same place, and
Jearn it from: the newspapers, you will Mr. Scholefeld-mind Mr. Scholefield,
judge for yoifrselves if any one inthe who had professed to, put down the procounty of Lancaster, couldhave been cession, and even the tea party on the
ignorant of what was then taking place. A16th, on account of thetroublesome-state
the..chane .Offmischief
a
There they were sitting incounciland ohi
in that conferenceinformation of occurrin g-Scholefield gives his chapel.
giving,
what they had seen. David Morrison for the occasion.
Mr.O'CONNOR. :-lle put down only
was at Eccles. on the 8th; at another
meeting on the 11th. Christopher Doyle, the procession;.he-didnot put down the-one. of the conference, wasat a meeting tea party.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
in Stockport, he was, conjoined with some
other person in Stockport in making Well-, he put down- only the procession,
that demand for the prisoners, and sug- and had-nothing to:do with the tea
gesting to the magistrates that it.would Iparty;, or he, did- not, put it down. But
not be safe to. detain themin.custody. this samegentleman who abandoned the
And, there it is that firsta demand was procession, and was consulting for the
,made onl somescore of prudence, and peace of thetown-that same, gentleinan
the concession obtained is made a ground permIitsa, meeting of the Chartist del egates to -takePlaceinhis chapel on. the,
for demanding a greater concession.
CHRISTOPHER DOYLE.:-Iwas 17th! He says," I kne wnothing; about
passe
It.I
was-in-- my- Surgery.
not in the workhouse at all.
ravent or
through the chapel to-bring
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
No, gentlemen, but after the mobbroke jackdaw tobe -fed at dinner time. I
in be was there, and came lack with went through the- chapel another timie to,
Leach arm in arm. Idon't.wantto fix give directions about. painting a gate
on Doyle the petty larcenies committed God help: me,, 1 knew nothing of what
passing inmy chapel. ":Gentlemen
at ,t workhouse. Nothing likeit. 'The was you
he,
do
believe that ? Whatis the eviobject, of this. prosecution has no such
scope or compass.: Myobj ect is.tosho dence? Not a single-one, of those dele.
that these..: persons were at varios met gates who wereacquittedis called-for the
ings,; that. they moved from place"to defence.
The JUDGE* .- No person proved to:,
place; that some. of them- went to .the co..n
t theyw kiew- ,be a delegate was anquiwed
ference of delegates;
The ATTORNEY--GENERAL
what they wer.aabout; that they, adopted
certain language;_ that thati langu,-cge Nowjust-attend to-. thiscircumstance.
meant mischief:, anid- that they knew what It has been, said:- The, roa mat Nobthe effect.,of it would be. M'Cartney lett's was, not- large :enouigh, and we- ap was proved to- be at the Con ference';. he plied,. for Mr Scholefleld's chapel." Now,
was ata. meeting at Eccles, and at. ant could, not Mr. Scholefield say-I
other meeting at Leigh in the' evening., pledged myself'tothe: magistrates to. have
There. is another, gentlemen., whose* case: noprocession-, and thereforet will have nois entitled to a few- words of observation. s9tep, taken to hazard the! public peace.'"
I mean Mr. Scholefield-. I find Mr. The 'meeting takes place., There are;
ia
Scholefield going with message to some persons, outside who are apparently
Scholefield- desires them to
meeting at Carpenter's Hall; I find exfl* watching.
pressions there, used- by him. Of the be sent away. There are persons coming,
truth of them, in, the -first instance, YOU and -he. sends!a message ...to desire that
are to judge,. and' of the meaning of them they would not come so publicly.- There9Into the,
in. the second ; and also whether, you- are various ways of getting
hbave so much. of whbat was' uttered,. as place. During the mneefting-he goes into!
will enable you to arrive at a fair and the- chapel and tells- them -that Turnerisjust ccnclusion as to its meaning., I find' arrested. How came that communica-

348
tion to be made to him, and how came
he -to make it to the meeting ? He receives and hands in a sovereign for the
Hunt's monument committee, as it is
said ; but he had nothing to do with the
Hunt's monument committee. Where
did that sovereign come from ? It is
quite clear that it was handed in for the
purposes of that meeting.
Mr. COBBETT:-It might be for
the Hunt's monument committee.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The treasurer is the person to receive and
pay money, and if that money were for
the monument how should he hand it in
to that meeting ? I leave you to decide
whether Scholefield knowingly allowed
the chapel to be used for the purpose to
which it was applied by the delegates.
If you think he knew nothing about it,
pray, gentlemen, for the sake of justice,
acquit him ; but if you are satisfied that
he had a knowledge of it, then he becomes
responsible for the use to which the chapel was applied. Gentlemen, I am extremely anxious not to detain you by addressing you at any great length, or beyond
what is absolutely necessary-beyond the
discharge of the duty which devolves on
me on the present occasion. I had intended to take some notice of the case of
each defendant, but after what they have
said, and after the note taken by my
Lord, I think it unnecessary to go over
the evidence as applying to each particular defendant. I have no doubt there
are some whose names will occur to his
Lordship respecting whom the proof will
fall short as to their having attended that
conference of delegates.
Now, gentlemen, the case will be this; you will find
that Woodruffe attended many meetings,
Aitkin, Challenger, Fenton, Pilling,
Brophy, Stephenson, and several others,
attended meetings before the conference
meeting at Manchester. Several of the
persons who attended these meetings
were themselves members of the conferlnce at Manchester. The mob marched
To Manchester. Manchester became one
scene of riot and confusion.

Meetings

took place on the 16th and 17th. On
the 17th the conference adopted their resolution and address appended to that
dangerous placard-the address of the
Executive, which calls upon the people

to appeal to the God of battle. The
strike went on, and continued for at least
iafortnight or three weeks after that period. And when it is said that the presence of any one person, however extensive his influence mightbe among the
lower orders; or however popular and
deservedly esteemed he might be for acts
of kindness or zeal on their behalf; or
however much he might have won their
confidence-I put it to you whether the
presence of any such person had the effect of putting an end to those tumults ?
Whether they were not put down by the
authority of the law? And whether
without that authority they would have
ceased ? Whether without ' the exercise of that authority they would not
have terminated probably in a civil
war ? I charge that the conduct of that
conference at Manchester was adopted
for the purpose of using language to advance, extend, and enforce that strike,
which strike frequently exhibited itself in
great violence and in lawless disregard of
the rights of property, and the constituted
authorities--as an overpowering, intimidating superiority that none could
withstand ; and then they call that
peace, law, and order.
Gentlemen,
the charge in the indictment is for
conspiring-that is for agreeing together
to produce a change in the constitution
by, among other acts, intimidation. It is
not necessary for me to bring home to
those individuals, some of whom, like
Cooper, may have been ready to fightothers to put a bold front on and intimidate-it is not necessary for me to shew
that all had contemplated what was done.
It is necessary for you to consider that
there was a general combination of
persons to go from place to place to
alarm, terrify, and intimidate so as to
stop labour. I believe that that conference
at Manchester, with Mr. O'Connor at
their head, thought the time was come
when certain language might be used to
accomplish, by intimidation and cessation
from labour, that change in the constitution which has been, in the course of this
inquiry, so frequently adverted to. Why,
gentlemen, could there be a strongei proof
of the intimidation that was used than
the evidence adduced respecting those
licenses which were given for the carry-

349
ing on of labour ? One man was allowed or are we to be at the mercy of large
to make mourning, and another was al- bodiesof people moving from place to
lowed to prevent goods from being place? Their conduct I admit was characdamaged by leavingthem inan unfinished terized by exemplary forbearance, they
state. There are two other classes of used the despotic authority they had ascases, one man said it should be men- sumed with great forbearance. I have littioned to the meeting in the morning, in tle to do with the speculative opinions of
order that they might approve of what political economy-I dare say no mar
was done. This was one of the most "more respects the right of the poor man
alarming indications of the effects of this to his labour, which is his property. It
conspiracy. If any one is offended with is property, and it is this you have to
the word conspiracy, I do not want to protect, you have to enable the poor man
to labour as he thinks proper, and not to
confine myself to it, but it is a legal expression defining a certain crime. It be told by his fellow men, whether he
is the combining together by act, and shall labour or cease to labour in order to
conduct, and co-operation, to produce a further some political object about which
certain result. You will judge for your- he may think nothing. Labour is as much
selves, whether you can entertain a doubt property and as much entitled to protecthat the defendants whom I first named tion as the estate of the wealthiest and
did go about from place to place to pro- loftiest peerin the realm. After all, what is
duce such a result. As to some of them, the difterence between what is commonly
it would be ridiculous to call your atten- called property, and labour. Labour is
tion for a moment to the evidence against the property of to day; that which you
them ; but the great point is this ;-what may leave to your children after you, is
think you of the conference ? If you the labour of yesterday. The labour of
think the Executive placard, the resolu- to day, if it has-produced anything that
tion and address of the conference, con- can be laid by, becomes capital; so that
sistent with peace, law, and order, then in reality there is a common interest in
do the defendants, who were present at the protection of labour and property;
that conference, the justice of acquitting for property is the representative of labour,
them. But looking at the whole scope and labour is the only property which
of these documents, and the paragraphs the poor man can command. These
which I have read to you from the. great elements of society are not to be
.NorthernStar, it will be for you to say set in hostile array against each other.
whether you can acquit them, or find It is perfectly true also that without
them guilty. Other topics have been in- labour, what is called capital may be
troduced with which I have nothing to valueless. It is just as true that in an
do. I have nothing to do with the high advanced state of civilization labour
names and great authorities which have would be quite as valueless if there
severally supported either universal suff- were not capital to give it employment.
rage, vote by ballot, or annual parlia- These two great elements of the high
ments. I know there are great names for state of cultivation in which we are placed
all these points of the Charter. And ought not to be set in hostile array
then there is electoral districts, payment against each other. The one is necessary
of members, and no property qualifica- to support the other. Neither can do
tion. No property qualification exists in without the other. I trust in God,
Scotland, and the practice is recognized, gentlemen, that the lesson of to day, so
as has been observed, elsewhere. I care lar as this enquiry is capable of affording
not if people go about- endeavouring to one, will go forth to the world. Let it
promote measures, most beneficial and be understood that labour and property
philanthropic, as they think, but most ought to have one common protection,
mischievous as others think; but I say and ought both be directed to the comthey have no right to produce that state mon end of all, the happiness of the comof things which others think contrary to munity and the glory of God. I hear
the safety of the commonwealth. The complaints made of the state of the poor
question is, are we to live under the safety and -omparisons made to the disadvantage
of the laws-? is property to be protected ? of the rich. I will pass over these things.

3O
gentlemen. I know not what yourfeelings
may be but when heard the intelligence,
when I hard the eloquence--fr frequently it wasl eloquent - when I heard the
speeches that have been made-I cannot
ut feel disposed to be proud of the talent
of the defendants, and of the effect of
the education of the working Classes
of this country. We heard much
yesterday that we must admire and
approve of, in point of talent and in
point of tone ; and I shall not now stop to
quarrel with some expressions which I
wish had been spared-expressions carrying too much of a tone of defiance. I
agree, gentlemen, with what was said by
Chief Justice Tindal, that one should not
too captiously weigh expressions, the probable import of which was nothing but
to communicate that the man who uttered
them was of a spirited and independent
mind. I watched the speeches of the defendants, speech afterspeech, andi say now
that the language uttered by me at Monmouth, in reference to Frost, is equally applicable to the present case. There is no
price at which it would-not be worth while
to purchase the innocence of all the defendants, mixed up as their guilt is with
much of the misery that probably may
have contributed to it. But your duty is
not to deal with questions of compassion,
but to deal with truth. As I said at
Monmouth, so also I am prepared to say
now, " If you can, with truth, give a verdict of not guilty-be it so; discharge
that pleasant duty. But if, when you
come seriously to reflect, casting aside
all political questions-ay, gentlemen,
and all questions of political economyand looking fearlessly but firmly and
steadily to the simple discharge of your
duty-if you find that there was intimidation out of Mianchester for the purpose
of producing a political change; then
those who took part in that intimidation
must of necessity be found guilty. And
if you find that in 1VManchester there
were persons who, while- the excitement
raged at the highest, used language on
which you can put no other construction
than that it was their intention to encourage and incite others to that course of
intimidation; then, gentlemen-, it wilt be
your duty to find them also guilty of
that charge. They are bound up with
the others in the evidence, and they can-

not, because they were not on the spot,
escape the consequences of-their own acts,
and their own incitement, if you believe
that those acts and that incitement were
adopted for the purpose which this indictment imputes to them. With these
observations Ieave the cae for the prosectItion in your hands, fully satisfied
that you have given the itmost patience
to it during the whole course of the enquiry. An expression from one of you
was, I believe, quite misunderstood, and
his Lordship was called upon to record
it. As I understand, it was simply an
enquiry whether, as my Lord had taken
notes of that which was evidence in the
case, the jury were required to take notes
of that which was not evidence in the
case. That was the way in which I anderstood it. And I mention it because
we must all agree that you have paid the
utmost attention, and have exhibited
the highest qualities, that jurymen could
exhibit during so long and so painful an
investigation. Certainly, I believe everybody has observed the impartiality of the
bench, an impartiality which everybody
in this Court must believe worthy of all
imitation-perhaps I may be allowed to
say, in the presence of his Lordship, that
his conduct has been above all praise,
and has drawn forth expressionts of apparties. In the course
probation from al]
of this long and painful enquiry 1 have
endeavoured to discharge the duty imposed on me without mixing up with
the prosecution anything that might
occasion harshness of feeling,, or give
any offence to any person present or
absent. Thisis the spiritin which-a prosecution oughtto be conducted. It now remains for you merely to hearthe direction
of his- Lordship, on those points of lw
that are connected with this case, and I
feel satisfied that you wil, in the face of
this great county, and before the public,
who very likely, as has been observed, are
watching with considerable anxiety the
result .of this important enquiry--you
will fearlessly, and without prejudice
against any of the defendants, or fiavour
towards the crown,---but still, remembering the solemnadutyyouhave to discharge,
and remembering that you are bound by
your oaths to discharge that duty to the
public, as well as to the defendants-you
will deliver that verdict which in justice

351
and truth you can reconcile to your
conscience by the evidence you have
heard.
The JUDGE:, Of course I must
caution you, that, from the nature of the

mayoccupy a con-

It is now

a 'quarter

to five o'clock.

I

dare say you are naturally anxious to get
rid of this very irksome duty, but the
question you have to ask yourselves is, do
you think you

will be

ia such a state of

mind ana body, that you can fairly disside le length of time ; and I do not charge your duty if you proceed now ?
limo vWhether, after I begin to sum up, The foreman intimated, on behalf of the
their wish to adjourn,
I shall: lje. the- power of adjourning. jury, that it
Therefore. I am entirely in your hands. and his Lordship consented to do so.
case, the summing up

was

E

OFC

SEVTNTU DAY 'S TRIAL.

•l~i jn

tment.

IT will be observed that the Indictment is, with the Evidence, thybasis of the
Learned Judge's summing up to the Jury. We, therefore, give this document entirea document which, it will be recollected, was stated by the Attorney-General, during
the trial, to have been framed with the greatest care, nicety,

and caution, so as to

prevent the slightest loop-hole through which the smallest Conspirator could possibly
escape,

We give it to immortality. It will be a guide to the legal student-an amusing
piece of reading for those hitherto unacquainted with the power, concentration, and
force of legal jargon-and will render our work the more complete as a portion of

In its way it is a literary curiosity-one which we may

the history of Chartism.

hereafter observe upon at some length.

MICHAELMAS

TERM.

IN THE SIXTH YEAR OF QUEEN VICTORIA.

ountp Ialatine of

attancatetr,

REMEMBERED, that at
a Session of our Sovereign United Victoria, by
the grace of God, of the Lady Kingdom of
Great, Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender
of the Faith, of hearing and determining, and
gaol delivery, held at the Court-house in Liverpool, in and for the County Palatine of Lancaster, on Monday, the tenth day of October,
in the sixth year of the reign of our said
L&dy the Queen, before Her Majesty's right
trusty and well-beloved cousin Baron' ouncillor
James Lord Abinger, Chief and of Her
Majesty's Court of ExcheqUer, Her Majesty's
tri tY and well-beloved Sir Edward HallAlder
so ter, ight, one of the Barons of Her MaJestyS' saidKnight, of Exch6euer, Sir Cresswell
Ciesswell, Court one of the Justiceof Her
Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, and othe, their
Companions, Justices the Queen, by the Letters
said-Sovereign Lady and Commissioners'of our
Patent .of her the said Lady the Queen, under
the seal'of the said County Palatine of Lancaster,
to the said-Lord Abinger, Sir Cresswell, Hall
Alderson, and Sir Cresswell Edward and
others,-or-any two or more of them directed,
whereof the said Lord Abinger, Sir Edward Hall
Alderson, and Sir Cresswell Cresswell (amongst
others), our said Sovereign Lady the Queen,
would have to be one, as well to hear and determine, as enquire, by the oaths of honest and
lawful men, of the said County Palatine of Lancaster, and by other ways, means, and methods,
which they can as well within liberties as without,
by which the truth of the matter may be the
better known and enquired into of all treasons,
misprisons of treason, insurrections, ebellions,
murders, felonies, homicides, burglaries, manslaughters, rapes of women, unlawful congregations and conventicles, unlawful speaking of
TO

W

v.-BE IT

words, coadjtfnctions, misprisons, confederacies,
false allegations, trespasses, riots, routs, retainings, escapes, contempts, NIlsities, negligences,
concealments, maintenances, oppressions, chainparties,deceits,an other misdemeanours, offences
and injuries whatsoever, and of the accessories to
the same, within the county aforesaid, as well
against the forms of certain statutes as against
the made, law, perpetrated, or and howsoever
had,common done, by whomsoever committed, by
whom and to whom, when, how, and after what
manner, and of all other articles and circumstances, the truth of the premises, or any of
them, in anywise concerning. And the same treasons and other the premises to hear and deterCounty aforesaid, the
mine, and the GaolCorrection at Kirkdale, in and
also the House of of the
Hundred of West Derby, in the said County
Palatine, to deliver according to law and the custom of the kingdom of our Sovereign Lady the
Queen, and so forth. It is upon the oaths of
twelve Jurors, good and lawful men within the
County Palatine aforesaid, impannelled and sworn
and charged to inquire and present for our
Sovereign Lady the Queen, and for the body of the
County Palatine aforesaid, presented as followeth,
(that is to say) Lancashire (to wit.) The Jurors
for our Lady the Queen upon their oath present,
That
FEARGUS O'CoNNoR, late of Manchester, in the
County of Lancaster, labourer.
PETER MURRAY M'DOUALL, late of the same
place, labourer.
JAMES SCHOLEFIELD, late of the same place,
labourer.
JAMES LEACH, late of the same place, labourer.
CHRISTOPHER DOYLE,

late of the same place,

labourer.
JOHN CAMPBELL, late of the same place, labourer

363
JONATHAN BAIRSTOW' . late of the same place,
labourer.
BERNARD M'CARTNEY, late of the same place,
labourer
JAMES ARTHUR, late of the same place, labourer,
otherwise called JAMES M'ARTHUR.

ALBERT WOOLFENDEN, late of the same place,

DAVID Ross, late of the same place, labourer.
RICHARD OTLEY, late of the same place, la.

GEORGE JOHNSON, late of the same place, la-

bour r.
GEORGE ULIAN HARNEY, late of the same
place, labourer.
JAMES CARTLEDGE, late of the same place, la-

bourer.
THOMAS COOPER, late of the same place, labourer.

WILLIAM HILL, late of the same place, labourer.
ROBERT BROOKE, late of the same place, labourer.
JAMES TAYLOR, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN HOYLE, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN THORNTON, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN NORMAN, late of the same place, labourer
JOSEPH CLARKE, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN MASSEY, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN FLETCHER, late of the same place, labourer.
THOMAS BROWNE SMITH, late of the same
place, labourer.
THOMAS FRASER, late of the same place, labourer.
JOHN ALLINSON, late of the same place, labourer.
JAMES GRASBY, late of the same place, labourer.
WILLIAM

BEESLEY, late

of the same

place,

labourer.
JAMES CHIPPENDALE, late of the same place,

labourer.

ROBERT LEES, late of the same place, labourer.

JOHN LEWIs, late of the same place, labourer.

PATRICK MURPHY BROPHY, late of the same

place, labourer.

bourer.
THOMAS STORAH, late of the same place, la.
bourer.
WILLIAM BOOTH,ate of the same place, labourer.
JOHN WILDE, late of the same place, labourer.
WILLIAM WOODRUFFE, late of the same place,
labourer.
FREDERICK AUGUSTUS TAYLOR, late of the
same place, labourer.
THOMAS PITT, late of the same place, labourer.
together with divers other evil-disposed persons,
to the Jurors aforesaid as yet unknown, on the
first day of August, in the sixth year of the reign
of our Sovereign Lady Victoria, and on divers
other days and times between that day and the
first day of October in the year aforesaid, at the
Parish of Manchester, in the County of Lancaster,
unlawfully did conspire, confederate, and agree together, divers unlawful tumultuous gathered
together by causing to be brought and and riotous assemblies of seditious and evil-disposed
persons in various parts of this Realm,
and by forcing and compelling divers of Her Majesty's peaceable subjects, being then employed
in their respective trades, manufactures, and oc.
cupations, to desist and depart from their respec.
tive employments and work, and by divers seditious and inflammatory speeches, libels, placards,
and other publications, to create alarm, discon.
tent, and confusion, with intent thereby unlaw.fully to effect and bring about a change in the
laws and constitution of this realm, against the
peace of our said Lady the Queen, Her Crown
and Dignity.

labourer.
SAMUEL PARKES,late of the same place, labourer.
THoMAs RAILTON, late of the same place, labourer.
ROBERT RAMSDEN, late of the same place, labourer.
SECOND COUNT.-Andthe Jurors aforesaid, upon
JAMES MOONEY, late of the same place, latheir oath aforesaid, do further present that the
bourer.
said Feargus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall,
THOMAS MAHON, late of the same place, laJames Scholefield, John Leach, Christopher
bourer.
Doyle, John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, BerJOHN LEACH, late of the same place, labourer.
nard M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called
DAVID MORRISON, late of the same place, la- James M'Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
bourer.
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas
JoHiN LOMAX, late of the same place, labourer.
Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, James Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John Norman,
JOHN AnRAN, late of the same place, labourer.
JAMES SKEVINGTON, late of the same place, la- Joseph Clarke, John Massey, John Fletcher,
Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser, John
bourer.
WILLIAM SCHOLEFIELD,

late of the same place,

labourer.
RICHARD PILLING, late of the same place, labourer.
WILLIAM AITKIN, late of the same place, labourer.
SANDY CHALLENGER, late of the same place,
labourer, otherwise called ALEXANDER
CHALLENGER.
GEORGE CANDELET, late of the same place, labourer.
JoHN DURHAM, late of the same place, labourer.
JAMES FENTON, late of the same place, labourer.
WILLIM STEPHENSON,, late of the same place,
abourer.
JOHN CROSSLEY, late of the same place, la.

burer.

Allinson, James Grasby, William Beesley,
James Chippendale, Samuel Parkes, Thomas
Railton, Robert Ramsden, Robert Mooney,
Thomas Mahon, John Leach, David Morrison,
John Lomax, John Arran, James Skevington,
William Scholefield. Richard Pilling, William
Aitkin, Sandy Challenger, otherwise called Alexander Challenger, George Candelet, John Durham, James Fenton, William Stephenson, John
Crossley, Robert Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John
Lewis, Patrick Murphy Brophy, George Johnson,
Thomas Storab, William Booth, John Wilde,,
William Woodruffe, Frederick Augustus Taylor,
Thomas Pitt, together with divers others evil
disposed persons to the Jurors aforesaid as yet
unknown, afterwards, to wit on the first day of
August, in the year aforesaid, and on divers other
days between that day and the first day of Octo-,
ber in the year aforesaid, unlawfully did conspire

354
conafederate, and agree together by force and violence, and by creating alarm, discontent, tumult,
and confusion, unlawfully to effect and bring
about a change in the laws and constitution of
this realm, against the peace of our said Lady
the Queen, Her Crown and Dignity.
'THIRD

COUNT.-And the Jurors aforesaid, on

their oath aforesaid, further present that
heretofore on the first day of August, in the
year aforesaid, and on divers other days and
times, between that day and the first day
of October in the year aforesaid, and at divers
places within this realm, divers evil disposed
persons unlawfully and tumultuously assembled
together, and by violence, threats and intimidations to divers other persons, being then peaceable subjects, of this realm, forced the said lastmentioned subjects, to leave their occupations and
employments, and thereby impeded and stopped
the labour employed in the lawful and] peaceable
carrying on, by divers large numbers of the
subjects of this realm, of certain trades, manufactures and businesses, and thereby caused
great confusion, terror and alarm in the minds
of the peaceable subjects of this realm, and that
afterwards, to wit, on the first day of August, in
the year aforesaid, and on divers other days and
times, between that day and the first day of
October, in the year aforesaid, at the parish
aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, the said Feargus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall, James
Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher Doyle,
John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard
M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called
James Me Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas
Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, James
Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John Norman, Joseph Clarke, John Massey, John Fletcher,
Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser, John
Allinson, James Grasby, William Beesley, James
Chippendale, Samuel Parkes, Thomas Railton,
Robert Ramsden, James Mooney, Thomas Mahon, John Leach, David Morrison, John Lomax,
John Arran, James Skevington William Scholefield,Richard Pilling, William Aitkin, Sandy Challenger, otherwise called Alexander Challenger,
George Candelet, John Durham, James Fenton,
William Stephenson,John Crossly, Albert Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John Lewis, Patrick Murphy
Brophy,George Johnson, Thomas Storah,William
Booth, JohnWilde,William Woodruffe, Frederick
AugustusTaylor,Thomas Pitt, togetherwith divers
other evil disposed persons to the juriors aforesaid
as yet unknown, did unlawfully conspire, combine,
confederate and agree together to aid, abet, assist,
comfort, support and encourage the said evil disposed persons in this Count first mentioned, to
continue and persist in the said unlawful assem-

said, and on divers other days and times between
that day and the first day of October, in the year
aforesaid, and at divers places, divers evil disposed
persons unlawfully and tumultuously assembled
together, and by violence, threats and intimidations to divers other persons being then peaceable
subjects of this realm, forced the said last-mentioned subjects to leave their occupations and
employments, and thereby impeded and stopped
the labour employed in the lawful and peaceable
carrying on by divers large numbers of the subjects of this realm, of certain trades, manufactures and businesses, and thereby caused great
confusion, terror and alarm in the minds of the
peaceable subjects of this realm, and, that afterwards, on the first day of August, in the year
aforesaid, and on divers other days and times,
between that day and the first day of October, in
the year aforesaid, in the parish aforesaid, in the
county aforesaid, the said Feargus O'Connor,
Peter Murray M'Douall, James Scholefield,
James Leach, Christopher Doyle, John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard M'Cartney,
James Arthur, otherwise called James Mc Arthur,
David Ross, Richard Otley, George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas Cooper, William
Hill, Robert Brooke, James Taylor, John Hoyle,
John Thornton, John Norman, Joseph Clarke,
John Massey, John Fletcher, Thomas Browne
Smith, Thomas Fraser, John Allinson, James
Grasby, William Beesley, James Chippendale,
Samuel Parkes, Thomas Railton, Robert Ramsden, James Mooney, Thomas Mahon, John
Leach, David Morrison, John Lomax, John
Arran, James Skevington, William Scholefield,
Richard Pilling, William Aitkin, Sandy Challenger, otherwise called Alexander Challenger,
George Candelet, John Durham, James Fenton,
William Stephenson, John Crossley, Albert
Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John Lewis, Patrick
Murphy Brophy, George Johnson, Thomas
Storah, William Booth, John Wilde, William
Woodruff, Frederick Augustus Taylor, Thomas
Pitt, together with divers other evil disposed
persons to the jurors aforesaid as yet unknown,
did unlawfully aid, abet, assist, comfort, support
and encourage the said evil disposed persons in
this count first-mentioned, to continue and persist in the said unlawful assemblings, threats,
intimidations and violence, and in the said impeding and stopping of the labour employed in
the said trades, manufactures and businesses,
with intent thereby to cause terror and alarm in
the minds of the peaceable subjects of this realm,
and by the means of such terror and alarm, violently and unlawfully to cause and procure certain great changes to be made in the constitution
of this realm, as by law established, against
the peace of our said Lady the Queen, Her
Crown and Dignity.

blings, threats, intimidations and violence, and

in the said impeding and stopping of the labour
employed in the said trades, manufactures and
businesses, with intent thereby to cause terror
and alarm in the minds of the peaceable subjects of
this realm, and by means of such terror and alarm,
.violently and unlawfully to cause and procure
certain great changes to be made in the constitution of this realm, as by law established against
the peace of our Lady the Queen, Her Crown
and Dignity.

FIFTH

CouNT.-And the Jurors aforesaid, on

their oath aforesaid, do further present, that,
Feargus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall
James Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher
Doyle, John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard M'Cartney, James Arthur otherwise called
James M'Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke,
James Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John
Norman, Joseph Clarke, John Massey, John
POURTH CouNT.-And the jurors aforesaid, on Fletcher, Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser,
their oath aforesaid, further present that hereto- John Allinson, James Grasby, William Beesley,
fore on the first day of August, in the year afore- James Chippendale, Samuel Parks, Thomas

355
Railton, Robert Ramsden, James Mooney, Tho-- SEVENTYH CoUNT.-And the jurors aforesaid, on
mas Mahon, John Leach, David Morrison, John their oath aforesaid, do further present that the said
Lomax, John Arran, James Skevington, William Feargus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall
Scholefield, Richard Pilling, William Aitkin, James Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher
Sandy Challenger otherwise called Alexander Doyle, John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Ber.
Challenger, George Candelet, John Durham, nard M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called
James Fenton, William Stephenson, John Cross- James M'Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
ley, Albert Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas
Lewis, Patrick Murphy Brophy, George John- Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, James
son, Thomas Storah, William Booth, John Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John NorWilde, William Woodruffe, Frederick Augustus man, Joseph Clarke, John Massey, John FletchTaylor, Thomas Pitt, together with divers other er, Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser, John
evil-dispdsed persons to the Jurors aforesaid as Allinson, James Grasby, William Beesley, James
yet unknown, afterwards, to wit, on the first day Chippendale, Samuel Parkes, Thomas Railton,
of August in the year aforesaid, and on divers Robert Ramsden, James Mooney, Thomas Maother days between that day and the first day of hon, John Leach, David Morrison, John Lomax,
October in the year aforesaid, together with di- John Arran, James Skevington, William Scholevers other evil-disposed persons, to the Jurors as field, Richard Pilling, William Aitkin, Sandy
yet unknown, unlawfully did endeavour to excite Challenger, otherwise called Alexander Chal.
Her Majesty's liege subjects to disaffection and lenger, George Candelet, John Durham, James
hatred of her laws, and unlawfully did endeavour Fenton, William Stephenson, John Crossley,
to persuade and encourage the said liege subjects Albert Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John Lewis,
to unite, confederate, and agree to leave their Patrick Murphy Brophy, George Johnson, Thoseveral and respective employments, and to mas Storah, William Booth, John Wilde, Wilproduce a cessation of labour, throughout a large liam Woodruffe, Frederick Augustus Taylor
portion of this realm, with intent, and in order Thomas Pitt, afterwards, to wit, on the day and
by so doing, to bring about and produce a change year first aforesaid, and on divers other days and
in the laws and constitution of this realm, against times between that day and the first day of Octhe peace of our said Lady the Queen, Her Crown tober, in the said year, unlawfully, wickedly, and
and Dignity.
maliciously incited, stirred up and endeavoured
to incite and stir up a great number of Her MaSIXT CoUNT.-The jurors aforesaid, upon their jesty's liege subjects, to the jurors aforesaid
oath aforesaid, further present, that Feargus unknown, with force and arms unlawfully, riotO'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall, James ously, and tumultuously to assemble and gather
Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher Doyle, together, and by threats, violence, and intimidaJohn Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard tion, unlawfully to force, and endeavour to force,
M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called diversof Her Majesty's peaceable subjects, being
James Mc Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley, persons then employed in certain manufactures,
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, trades, and businesses, to depart from their em.
Thomas Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, ployment and work, and against the peace of our
James Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, said Lady the Queen, her Crown and Dignity.
John Norman, Joseph Clarke, John Massey,
John Fletcher, Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas
EIGHTH CoUNT.-And the Jurors aforesaid,
Fraser, John Allinson, James Grasby, William on their oath aforesaid, present, that the said Fear-

Beesley, James Chippendale, Samuel Parkes,
Thomas Railton, Robert Ramsden, James
Mooney, Thomas Mahon, John Leach, David
Morrison, John Lomax, John Arran, James
Skevington, William Scholefield, Richard Pilling,
William Aitkin,

Sandy Challenger,

otherwise

gus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall, James
Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher Doyle,
John, Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard
M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called
James M'Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas
Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, James

called Alexander Challenger, George Candelet,
John Durham, James Fenton, William Stephen- Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John Norson, John Crossley, Albert Woolfenden, Robert man, Joseph Clarke, John Massey,JohnFletcher,
Lees, John Lewis, Patrick Murphy Brophy, Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser, John
George Johnson, Thomas Storah, William Booth,

Allinson,

James

Grasby,

William

Beesley,

John Wilde, William Woodruff, Frederick Au- James Chippendale, Samuel Parkes, Thomas
gustus Taylor, Thomas Pitt, together with divers
other persons and to the jurors aforesaid as yet
unknown, to the number of one thousand and more,
on the first day of August, in the sixth year of
the reign of our Sovereign Lady Victoria, and on
divers other days and times, between that day
and the first day of October, in the year aforesaid, at the parish of Manchester, in the county
of Lancaster, unlawfully did conspire, confederate

Railton, Robert Ramsden, James Mooney,
Thomas Mahon, John Leach, David Morrison, John Lomax, John Arran, James
Skevington, William Scholefield, Richard Pilling, William Aitkin,
Sandy
Challenger,
otherwise called Alexander Challenger, George
Candelet, John Durham,
James Fenton,
William Stephenson, John Crossley, Albert
Woolfenden, Robert Lees, John Lewis, Patrick
and agree together to assemble and meet together Murphy Brophy, George Johnson, Thomas
unlawfully,riotouslyandtumultuously,and to cause Storah, William Booth, John Wilde, William
divers otherpersons to assemble and meettogether, Woodruffe, Frederick Augustus Taylor, Thomas
and by threats, menaces, violence and intimida- Pitt, together with divers other lawless disorderly
tion, unlawfully to force and endeavour to force and evil disposed persons, to the number of one
divers of Her Majesty's peaceable subjects, being thousand and more, whose names are, to the
persons then employed in certain manufactures, Jurors aforesaid, as yet unknown, afterwards, to
trades and businesses, to depart from their em- wit, on the first day of August in the year aforeployment and work, against the peace of our said said, and on divers other days and times between
Lady the Queen, Her Crown and Dignity.
that day and the first day of October in the year

356
aforesaid, with force and arms, at the parish
aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, unlawfully did
meet and assemble together in a formidable and
menacing manner, with clubs, sticks, and other
offensive weapons, to disturb the tranquillity,
peace, and good order of this Realm, in contempt
of our said Lady the Queen and her laws, and
against the peace of our said Lady the Queen,
her Crown and Dignity,
NINTH CoUNT.-And the Jurors aforesaid, on
their oaths aforesaid, do further present, that the
said Feargus O'Connor, Peter Murray M'Douall,
James Scholefield, James Leach, Christopher
Doyle, John Campbell, Jonathan Bairstow, Bernard M'Cartney, James Arthur, otherwise called
James M'Arthur, David Ross, Richard Otley,
George Julian Harney, James Cartledge, Thomas
Cooper, William Hill, Robert Brooke, James
Taylor, John Hoyle, John Thornton, John Norman, Joseph Clarke, John Massey, John
Fletcher, Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas Fraser,
John Allinson, James Grasby, William Beesley,
James Chippendale, Samuel Parkes, Thomas
Railton, Robert Ramsden, James Mooney,
Thomas Mahon, John Leach, David Morrison,
John Lomax, John Arran, James Skevington,
William Scholefield, Richard Pilling, William
Aitkin, Sandy Challenger, otherwise called Alexander Challenger, George Candelet, John Durham, James Fenton, William Stephenson, John
Crossley, Albert Woolfenden, Robert Lees,
John Lewis, Patrick Murphy Brophy, George
Johnson, Thomas Storah, William Booth,
John Wilde, William Woodruffe, Frederick Augustus Taylor, Thomas Pitt, together with divers
other evil disposed persons, to the number of one
thousand and more, whose names are to the
jurors aforesaid as yet unknown, afterwards, to
wit, on the first day of August in the year gfore-

said, and on divers other days and times betweem
that day and the first day of October in the year
aforesaid, with force and arms at the Parish
aforesaid, in the County aforesaid, unlawfuHy,
riotously, routously, and tumultuously did assemble and gather together to disturb the peace
of our said Lady the Queen, and being then and
there so assembled and gathered together, did
then and there make a great noise, riot, rout,
tumult, and disturbance, and did then and there
unlawfully, riotously, routously, and tumultuously, remain and continue together, making
such riot, rout, noise, tumult, and disturbance,
for a long space of time, to wit, for the space of
six hours and more then next following, to
the great terror of the liege subjects of our said
Lady the Queen, then and there being in contempt of our said Lady the Queen, and her
Laws, and against the Peace of our said Lady
the Queen, her Crown and Dignity.
Witnesses.
Richard Beswick
William Griffin
Archibald M'Mullin
Nathaniel Higgin
Henry Mason
William Clayton
James Buckley
Luke M'Dermot
Joseph Armitage
John Robinson
Thomas Beattie
John Hanley

(Sworn in Court.)

William Standrin
John Fisher
William Ledward
Simeon Titton
John Fairweather
Morris Yacoby
Robert Newton
Joseph Little
John Heap
John Robinson Scott
Peter Jameson
Abraham Longson

(True Bill.)

TRIAL OF FEARGUS O'CONNOR, ESQ.,
AND OTHERS.

EI

GHT H

DAY,

Thursday, JIarch 9th, 1843.

THE SVMMING UP.
Great interest was excitea this morning by the summing up. The apparent difference of opinion between Mr. Baron Rolfe and the Attorney-General on some of
the points connected with the indictment, created much speculation as to the probability of the escape of certain sections of the defendants. The summing up, it
was anticipated, would be very lengthy, but it was even more elaborate than was
expected. The Learned Judge, who had been most laboriously engaged since the
commencement of the trial, had evidently taken the greatest pains, not only in
bringing the general mass of testimony before the Jury in order to enable them to
judge of the general question whether a conspiracy had existed or not, but afterwards in apportioning teach defendanht the evidence which related to hisacts,
whether bearing for or against him. Whatever opinion may exist as to the policy
or result of the trial, there can be but one opinion-an opinion which prevails
amongst the defendants themselves, that it was impossible for such a prosecution to
be more mildly conducted by the Law Officers of the Crown, or that it could have
been presided over by a more painstaking or impartial Judge.
The Learned Judge took his seat on the bench at nine o'clock precisely. "From
the prevailing influenza," as the reporter of a local journal justly,.observes, "we
never recollect such a continual and wholly irrepressible noise in a court of justice.
The coughing, sneezing, and other audible symptoms of the prevailing epidemic
were at times so loud as to appear like the simulated colds with which honourable
members are sometimes seized in the House of Commons; and, occasionally, they
prevented even the purport of the Learned Judge's observations from being heard
even at the table. The Learned Baron himself, in commencing his address, apologised for the low tone of his voice, which, he said, was quite hoarse from the effects
of a bad cold; a catarrh frequently interrupted his observations; while the bar, the
jury, the defendants, the reporters, the officers of the court, and the auditors generally, contributed their full share to the general disturbance. The under-sheriff
shouted and "hushed " himself hoarse, with labouring to obtain an impossible
silence; and, ,we repeat, we never before witnessed an audience so universally labouring under 'a bad cold.'"
AA

358
Immediately after the names of the
jurors were called over, Mr. Baron Rolfe
summed up as follows:Gentlemen of the jury, we are at length
arrived at what I may call the last stage
of this very important investigation; and
you have received from both sides, as
well from the prosecution as from the defendants, an expression of the deep sense
entertained of the unremitting and patient
attention which you have given to the
case; and I must now bespeak that same
attention while I enedavour, in the discharge of my duty, to call that attention,
first, to what the nature of the charge
against the defendants is; next, to what
the law is, as referable to charges of that
description; and, lastly, which is the most
important part of the case, to what the
evidence is, bearing generally upon the
defendants as a body, and particularly
upon each defendant, as bringing or not
bringing them or him within that law
which makes criminal the acts charged
against them. Gentlemen, I say that I
shall bespeak your attention. Of course
:shall not waste the public time by anything like an apology for asking your
attention, for it is your duty to give your
attention to the things brought before
you, but, I must apprise you, that it may
e a work of some little difficulty on your
parts to keep your attention fully directed
to what is about to be laid before you,
and that for two reasons. First, because
I shall feel it my duty to call your attention
to every portion of the evidence before
you,-an irksome task I am aware,-because you have had to listen to a great deal
already, but I think in the present case
I cannot dispense with that part of my
duty. And, secondly, because I shall
feel it necessary to point out a few of the
legal distinctions on subjects of this nature, which are not very easy for you to
apprehend; indeed, not always easy for
persons familiar with such subjects, fully
to appreciate. Gentlemen, you have been
told, over and over again, what no doubt
is the fact, that what these defendants
stand charged with is the crime of conspiracy, and with that only. There were
originally other charges in the indictment,
which it is not necessary to discuss, as
they have been withdrawn. What I
would now call your attention to is the
charge of conspiracy, and that alone.

What, then, is that act, or those acts,
which, in tbh eye of the law, constitute
conspiracy. It has been said, that there
is great difficulty on this subject, and
great confusion in explaining what constitutes onsiiracy1? I 1o ~i6tee those
difficulties to the same extent as they have
been -suggested by others. Doubtless,
cases may arise in which it might be difficult to say, if certain acts constitute
conspiracy, why they do; but, in the
present case, there can be no difficulty at
all; because, for the purpose of this investigation, it is quite sufficient for us to
define conspiracy as being a combination
of two or more persons, either to do, or
to cause others to do, an illegal act, or to
bring about a legal act by illeal means.
You must not understand me, in stating
tha yas laying down, as a general proposition, that nothing can be a conspiracy
which does not come within such a proposition. Any of you may choose not to deal
with John Smith, the baker, but if all of
you combine together not to deal with
him, but as far as you can prevent others
from dealing with him, that would not be
an illegal act, but, no doubt, it would be
a conspiracy. I make this observation
to guard myself against laying down a
rule that nothing is conspiracy but what
comes within this definition. I define,
in this case, conspiracy to be a combination of two or more persons, either to do,
or cause others to do, an illegal act, or to
bring about a legal act by illegal means.
Taking that as the definition, I must now
call your attention to what the indictment
In
charges against these defendants.
bringing this before you, I am necessarily obliged to use some legal terms,
which, though familiar to lawyers, are
not so to jurors. I shall, therefore, studiously avoid the use of such terms, and
endeavour to translate into ordinary language,' that which long time and great
precision have made the language and
style of the law. An indictment consists, and does in this case consist, of a
variety of what are called counts-that is
Each
a variety of separate charges.
count states the charge in a somewhat
different manner; for fear the charge, if
only stated in the manner in whichli it
might appear in the first count, might
not be borne out by the evidence, and
the party might be acquitted. The

369
charge is therefore stated in a variety of
ways in order that, if the evidence should
not precisely bear out one, it might hit
another form of charge. In this indictment there were originally nine counts.
Two of them were put out of the question because they did not relate to a conspiracy; so that there remained seven
different counts, or charges relating to
I shall in the first
conspiracy only.
place shew what these counts are, and I
think I shall be able,: practically, to reduce the number much below seven, because several of them, in truth, turn out,
in reference to the evidence, to be predisely the same. The first count charges
'" that Feargus O'Connor, together with
divers other evil-disposed persons to
the jurors unknown," (that is to the grand
jury) " between the 1st of August and
the 1st of September last, unlawfully did
gree, by causconspire, confederate, a
lng to be brought together divers unlawful, tumultuous, and riotous assemblies of
seditious and evil-disposed persons, and
by forcing and compelling divers of her
Majesty's peaceable subjects, being then
employed in their respective trades, to
desist and to depart from their work, and
by divers seditious and inflammatory
speeches, libels, placards, and other publications, to create alarm, discontent, and
confusion, with intent thereby unlawfully to effect and bring about a change
in the laws and constitution of this realm."
That is the first count. The second
count is exactly the same, except, that
instead of enumerating the different
modes of violence by which they are
charged with endeavouring to carry their
object into effect, the count states that
they did " conspire by force and violence, and creating alarm'r"-that was
meant to meet the possible case of their
having proved a conspiracy to cause a
change in the laws, anid contstitution of
the country-which here meant to make
the Charter become the law of the land-.
but failing to prove anything like intimidating the workmen. But it is quite
clear, that, if there had been a conspiracy
to cause a change in the laws and constitution of the country, and that violence
was used for that purpose-that violence
would consist in stopping labour. No
doubt that was the reason why the second
count was made out. As it is clear,

however, from theeviWdene w duced,
that the "force and violei ce" here
charged, m natsthei titjridadton of other
persons and prevenfing them ,from pursuing their oeni phtions, this count is,
substantially, the samne as the first, and
you are therefore to dikiiss it. your
frm
consideration. The grand charge is con
tained in the next. count-hat the ;defendants conspired together, by seditious
placards, riots, arid tunmlts in the country, to bring about a change in the laws
and constitution. The framers of this
indictment probably said this-" We
may fail in making out that these disturbances and " turn-outs" were occasioned by any conspiracy of this sort; it
may turn out that the strike and tumults
which took place, were the result of
something with which the conspirators"
(if we may call them conspirators) " had
nothing to do; and, in order to meet
this, 'we will put the charge in another
shape." And then they state that, at the
period in question, divers evil-disposed
persons had tumultuously assembled, and,
by force and threats, forced the subjects
of her Majesty to leave their occupations,
and thereby impeded divers trades, to the
great terror and alarm of her Majesty's
subjects.
And then the indictment
charges, that Feargus O'Connor and
the other defendants conspired to aid
and assist the same evil-disposed persons to combine in unlawful assemblies, to create alarm, and by reason thereof to bring about a change
in the laws and constitution. The charge
is similar to the first charge, except that
it does not charge the conspirators with
being the originators of the tumults and
confusion. But assuming that it had
some connexion with the first charge;--it charges the conspirators with having
combined to aid and assist the " turnouts" in their unlawful assemblies, and
unlawful turning out of work, and so effect a change in the laws of the country.
You will see that there is little difference
between them. The first charge is that
others having originated the outrages, the
defendants conspired together to aid and
assist them in the prosecution of their design. The fourth charge merely varies
the third in an immaterial way. It omits
the word " conspiracy" altogether, but
charges the defendants with " aiding

260
and assisting." I do not think there is a
material difference between the two. If a
aumber of persons do " aid and assist,"
lit is not exactly the same thing as " conspiring to aid and assist," but the differ_*ence is so slight, that I think I shall be
aiding you in putting it out of considera,tion. The charges in the first four counts
substantially are;-lst. That the defenidants conspired by force and violence to
'bringabout a change in the laws and conlititution; and-2nd. That others having
caused workmen forcibly to depart from
their labour, the defendants conspired
to aid, assist, and encourage them in
Continuing the violent stopping of labour,
in order thereby to bring about a change
in the laws and constitution. The fifth
~ount varied the change in a different
iform. In one view of the case this count
is exceedingly important, and demands
It statesyour particular attention.
' That Feargus O'Connor, with divers
persons unknown, conspired to excite the
Queen's subjects to disaffection and hatred of her laws." Standing alone that
nothing: these are mere idle words,
is.
You cannot charge persons with exciting
hatred to the laws-for how is that done ?
-You must have that explained. By
what means is that done ?-You must
put that out of the question.-" By endeavouring to persuade and encourage the
'Queen's subjects to unite, confederate,
and agree to leave their employments,
and produce a cessation of labour through
a large portion of the realm, with intent
thereby to bring about a change in the
laws and constitution." The charge
here against the defendants is, that they
andeavoutired to persuade persons engaged
in trade, and others engaged in labour, to
cease from their labour till the Charter(for that, in short is what is meant by
'a change in the laws and constitution")
should become the law of the land. This
count differs from both the former charges
in this material ingredient ;-that it does
not charge upon the defendants the exciting to, or encouraging of, any violation
of the laws whatsoever; unless the merepersuading workmen not to work till
ljy
the Charter becomes law, be of itself criminal. Now, gentlemen, you have heard
it stated by one of the learned counsel at
the bar, that a difference of opinion exists among very high legal authorities as

to whether, under the comparatively recent acts of paRiament passed on the subject of combinations among workmenthe merely persuading people not to work
till the Charter became the law of the
land is, or is not, criminal. For the purposes of this enquiry I should distinctly
tell you to consider it criminal-for this
reason, that one of the counts in the indictment charges no other criminality but
that. And if you should be of opinion,
in reference to all, or any, of the defendants, that that is all-of which they have
been guilty, then you will find them
guilty on that count only; and it will be
then for the Court of Queen's Bench to
say whether that count does, or does not,
bring them within anything criminal according to the true construction of
the aw. You are aware that a great
number of statutes were passed from time
to time, from the earliest ages, rendering
any combination among the workmen
not to work under certain wages-laws
have been passed, from time to time, making that, of itself, a very serious offence.
Modern views of political economy-and,
perhaps I am not stepping much out of
my path to say, very much more enlightened views- began to prevail about
twenty years ago. This question then
began to be mooted, 1"whether it was
equal and impartial justice to allow-as
the law did within certain limits-to allow
employers to meet together and say, ' We
will not pay more than certain prices for
our work,' whilst it was unlawful for the
workpeople to meet and say, 'We will
not work for less than a certain price."
In order to put both parties on an equal
footing an act of parliament was then
passed, the 5th of George TV. This
enactment was found, immediately after
it passed, to be extremely inconvenient,
and ineffectual for obtaining the object in
view, and consequently in the following
year (1825) it was repealed, and a new
act was passed (the 6th Geo. IV.) regulating the subject; and this act is now
the governing law on this point. By this
act all other acts were repealed, and a
provision was introduced making it highly
penal for any persons to meet together
in order by intimidation, threats, or violence, to interfere with others in the exercise of their judgment, as to the rate of
wages for which they were content to

361
work.

The third section of the act to rate of wages or prices, which the persons pre.

sent at such meeting or any of them, shall require or demand for his or their work, or the
hours or time for which he or they shall work in
any manufacture, trade or business, or who shll
enter into any agreement, verbal or written,
among themselves, for the purpose of fixing the
rate of wages or prices which the parties entering
into such agreement, or any of them, shall require
or demand for his or their work, or the hours, o
time for which he or they will work, in any manu
facture, trade or business; and that persons,5o
meeting for the purposes aforesaid, or entering
into any such agreement as aforesaid, shall not be
or prevent, or endeavour to prevent, any jour- liable to any prosecution orpealty for so doi;

which I have referred, says

be
And it further enacted, that, from and
And be it further enacted, that, from and
after :the passing of this act, if any person shall,
by violence to the person or property, or by
threats or intimidation, or by molesting or in
any way obstructing another, force or endeavouring to force any journeyman, manufacturer,
workmaq or other person hired or employed in
any manufacture, trade or business, -to depart
from his hiring, employment or work, or to
return his work before the same shall be finished,

neyman, manufacturer, workman, or other per- any law or statute to the contrary nothwison not being hired or employed from hiring standing."
himself to, or from accepting work or employThe next section contains a similar
ment from, any person or persons; or if any provision as to masters, that might le
That is the law on
person shall molest or in any way obstruct termed the converse.

another for the purpose of forcing or inducing
such person to belong to any club or association,
or to contribute to any common fund, or to pa.
any fine or penalty, or on account of his not
belonging to anly particular club or association,
or not having contributed, or having refused to
contribute, to any common fund, or to pay any
fine or penalty, or on account of his not having
complied, or of his refusing to comply, with any
rules, orders, resolutions, or regulations, made
to obtain an advance or to reduce the rate of
wages, or to lessen or alter the hours of work
ing, or to decrease or alter the quantity of work,
or to regulate the mode of carrying on any inanufacture, trade, or business, or the management
thereof; or if any person shall by violence to
the person or property of another, or by threats
or intimidation, or by molesting or in any way
obstructing another, force or endeavour to force
any manufacturer or person carrying on any
trade or business, to make any alteration in his
mode of regulating, managing, conducting, or
carrying on such manufacture, trade, or business, or toglimit the number of his apprentices,
or the number or description of his journeymen,
workmen, or servants; every person so offending,

the subject, and I do not know that I am
stepping out of my way in saying that it
is as wise a provision as could exist.
Persons may meet together for the piipose of determining that they shall not
work under twenty shillings a week, and
that those of them who cannot get that
must be out of work. Just in the same
way masters may meet together, and sy,
e will not give more wages than
-"
so and so, and if we cannot get workmen
content to
at pr , wee
That is the law
Everybody is pere
fee to bring his capital into the market
on such terms as he may think fit; and,
on the other hand, every one has a rig t
to bring his labour into the market on
such terms as he may think fit; and,
provided there is no interference with the
free will of others, the law, in doing thalt,
has done all it can do-all that it ought
to do. That being the law, this fifth
count charges the defendants with having
endeavoured to persuade certain workmen
engaged in the factories to confederate
and leave their employment, and produce

of
or aiding, abetting, or assisting therein, being a cessation of labour in a large portion
convicted thereof in mnianner hereinafter men- the realms, with intent thereby to bring
tioned, shall be imprisoned only, or shall and bout a cnge i the lawsand consitud
may be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for on this subject is this :-It
being lawful
any time not exceeding three calendar months." for persons to meet together, where no
violence is practised, and determine not
The fourth section says,
"Provided always, and be it enacted, that this to work except upon certain terms, can it
Act shall not extend to subject any persons to then be illegal for others to combine topunishment, who shall meet together for the sole gether to pursuade them to do so? It has
purpose of consulting upon, and determining the been suggested that it is illegal; first,

362
because it did not necessarily follow that
because it was legal for certain persons
to enter into such an agreement, it was
therefore legal for others to combine to
pursuade them to do so. I don't know
whether that will come within the law of
conspiracy or not. Again, whether, having a right to persuade others not to work
without a certain rate of wages, it was
not unlawful to make that a means of
bringing about a change in the laws and
constitution. It is charged here as an
illegality, and as such we will treat it. I
thought it necessary, that a satisfactory
explanation of how the matterstands should
be given here. I have therefore explained
what is charged as an illegality here. I
have again, gentlemen, to remind you, of
what, up to this point, the indictment
charges. The first count charges the defendants with having originated, by
conspiracy, a strike, tumult and confusion,
in order to cause the Charter to become
the law of the land-to alter the laws and
constitution means the same thing. The
second count charges that others having
caused the strike, the defendants combined to assist those parties in order
thereby to make the Charter the law of
the land. The third, dropping all about
violence, charges the defendants, simply
with endeavouring to excite persons to
desist from labour altogether till the
Charter became the law of the land.
Gentlemen, there are two other counts on
which I shall dwell slightly. One of
these charges Mr. O'Connor and others
with having conspired together between
the 1st of August and the 1st of October,
to meet together violently and tumultuously, and to cause others by violence,
threats and intimidation to depart from
their employment, leaving out all that
about causing the Charter to become the
law of the land. I presume that was
meant to meet the case that might be the
result of the evidence; namely, that you
might be satisfied that there was an effort
to force people to abstain from work, but
might not be satisfied that any part of
that object was to cause the Charter to become the law of the land. It might be
that there was no other object but to produce a cessation from labour. The sixth
and seventh counts are exactlyv the same
in that respect; so that you will see that
the indictment charges the offence of con-

spiracy on the defendants in four different
forms; and in order to convict them you
must be satisfied that the evidence shews,
either that they combined, or conspired
together, in order to cause workmen to be
forcibly expelled from their work, and
made, against their will, to cease from their
labour; and also to create tumults
throughout the country in order to cause
the Charter to become the law of the
land; or, that other persons having caused
that tumult, they combined and conspired
to aid and assist those who had departed
from labour, in order that the Charter
might become the law of the land; or
that, without violence, they did combine to
persuade others, without acts of violence,
to cease from labour in order to produce a
change in the laws and constitution; or,
that they combined together to cause tumult and a cessation from work without
any reference to ulterior objects or any
alteration of the laws and constitution of
the country. Gentlemen, I have endeavoured as well as I could to make you
understand what the law of the case is.
In a case of this nature it is of the utmost importance that you should have
the thing clearly in your minds; for in
looking at the evidence in this case, you
are to consider whether you can convict
the defendants, or such of them as the
evidence may apply to, of a combination
or conspiracy to effect one or other of
those illegal objects to which I have called
your attention. Gentlemen, there is another difficulty which may present itself
to persons in your station, who are not
conversant with legal proceedings-a difficulty which necessarily besets a case of
this sort,-it is this: that in order to
convict parties of the offence of conspiracy various modes may be adopted,
differing as far from each other as the
east is from the west. And gat cannot
be better illustrated than it is by the evidence in the present case. The chargebe it always present to your minds-is not
that of having attended illegal meetings,
or of having uttered seditious speeches,
or of having turned workmen from
their employment, or of having caused
tumult, violence, and outrage, (and if the
defendants, or any of them, have been
guilty of any of these, they are still
liable to be indicted for such offence;
and their conviction or acquittal on this

indictment will: neither proteet nor hurt yond what I have stated to you the law
them), but the sole charge here is, that would warrant. Probably be meant the
they combined and conspired together to same thing that I did, but I think the exeffectuate certain objects; if they did so, pression made use of was calculated to misfrom that moment the crime here charged lead. He stated, in substance-these are
is complete, even thou *I not a single not his exact words-that if these parties
man has been turned-out, or a single were going about lecturing, and exciting
outrage committed. On the other hand, parties to all those acts referred to in tha
if there was a conspiracy, and that some charge, at Mottram Moor, Ashton, Hyde,
who took part in the proceedings resulting Duckingfield, &c., and if they were all refrom it were ignorant of the conspiracy commending the same line of conduct,
and the object of it, they are no more guilty that that would amount to a conspiracy.
of the charge contained in this indictment The only qualification I put on that in
than those who took no part in it; not laying down the law is this ;-that that
having entered into the combination or would not amount to conspiracy at all.
agreement. That being so, I say the It might be evidence fiom which you
difficulty, at the very outset, likely to might infer a previous combination-it
present itself to the minds of those con- might be evidence leading more or less
sidering subjects of this sort for the first forcibly to that conclusion, according to
time is, that-If the crime consists in all the surrounding circumstances. Now,
the agreement to do certain unlawful acts, for instance, suppose there had been a
how are we to find that any such agree- very great desire to obtain arise of wages;
rnent has been entered into ? In the and a very great desire to obtain the
ordinary transactions of life, when parties' Charter-suppose that, taking that state
enter into an agreement, they manifest it of things which has been represented as
by reducing it to writing, or by making having existed-that the leading people
it verbally among themselves, and tbe among the turn-outs at all the different
evidence of the writing, or the person towns are making this sort of lecturing
who heard the agreement made, will be and speechifying, and exciting the peosufficient to substantiate it. But in order' ple to acts of violence, and to insist upon
to convict persons of a conspiracy must having the Charter-ifthat leads you to
we have the same sort of evidence ?---- conclusion that there has been-(I
the
1Must we find the parties reducing to don't say that it is all necessary that there
-writing what they conspired to do? Or, should be a meeting) any arrangement
must we have the evidence of somebody by any sort of machinery that they should
who was present and heard them, when do this, then, not only would they be
they were entering into the contract ? guilty of the acts committed at those
Certainly not. Perhaps the most satius- meetings, but it might be a proof that
On the
fa(ctory evidence would be that of persons' there was such combination.
who were present, when the individuals other hand, it might be evidence that
charged with the crime had entered into there was no such combination at all. The
the agreement; or when they did that circumstances of unityof object, and samewhich clearly amounted to such an agree- ness of views, would explain the fact of
ment, but this is by no means necessary., their taking the same course, and proYou m
convict parties of conspiring pounding the same objects; and shows that
together S effect a certain purpose, al- no one knew at all what the other was dothough you may have no writing to show ing. The nearer the parties are the
such combination, or agreement, or al- more they are in the habit of associating,
though you may.not have the evidence and the more probable their previous
of any party who was present, and heard combination; the more distant the parsuch an agreement when it was entered ties are, and the less their intercourse With
into. You may infer that there was such each other, the less probable is it that any
Now,
an agreement from the acts which the previous combination occurred.
parties committed. In the reply of the gentlemen, in the present case, you see,
.Attorney-General, yesterday, he was al- there will be pressing on your minds parfiding, in some degree, to this view of ticular difficulties arising from the facts
the case. I think his language went be-I proved as evidence of previous combina-

364
tion. As to a great many of these de.fendants there will be no other evidence
whatever, at least that I have been able to
discover, of previous combination, or
agreement to carry out any of those illegal purposes, except so far as it is to be
inferred from their acts in attempting to
carry the strike out. With regard to
others of the defendants, so far from that
being the case, it is quite clear they took
no part at all in the actual carrying out
of the strike; and the only evidence
against them would be-(I allude particularly to what are called the delegates in
Scholefield's chapel) their meeting together and entering into the resolutions
and transactions of that meeting. So that
as to a portion of the defendants you will
have to convict them-(if you do convict
them) on one sort of evidence; the inference from their acts; and as to the
other defendants you will have to convict
them on evidence of a totally different
character-on, I may say, a priori evidence, and that in spite of their
non-participation in those acts which
form the sole evidence against the other
defendants. Before I call your attention to the evidence, it is extremely important that I should direct your minds
to one point, it is this :-You may be
satisfied, taking the law from me, that in
order to convict all, or any, of the defendants, you must convict them of one and
the same conspiracy ;-one and the same.
I don't mean by that that every conspirator-I use the word for shortness but I
do not employ it in an offensive senseI do not mean that every one of the defendants used exactly the same influence.
If you think that all the defendants, or
any number of them, combined together
for the purpose of carrying the Charter,
and some of them said, "I won't use any
violence at all,"- (and you find that
some of them used no violence at all;
nor consented to the use of violence)" I will give my countenance to nothing
but a voluntary abstinence from labour;"
and that others said-" I will encourage
a voluntary abstinence from labour, and
a forced abstinence also"-if you find
that the parties all agreed substantially in
one and the same act, you may convict
them all, but on different counts; those
who declared or took part in violence,
upon the counts relating to violence; and

those who stopped short of violence an&
took no part in it, upon the other portion
of the indictment. It may be difficult te
conceive such a state of things, because
if a party knew that others were encou
raging viole# for the promotion of the
common pufpose, he must instantly know
that he, being joined with those persons,
was encouraging violence also, and that
he was then combining in the whole, although he does not choose to say, " I am
combining in the whole," and proof of
that would be sufficient to enable you to
say that it was one and the same conspiracy, although they do not all go the
same length, or all take the same active
part in carrying out the common design.
Gentlemen, what I mean by saying that
it may be one and the same conspiracy
is this:-If you should be of opinion,
in the first instance, that there was among
some persons a combination to cause a
riot for the purpose of occasioning a rise
of wages, though they were no parties to
any combination about carrying the Charter, they would be guilty of the offence
of conspiracy. But if you are of opinion
that the defendants entered into, insulated
it may be, and took part in, a movement
resulting from a conspiracy in which
they took no part whatever, the mere circumstance that what they intended to
effect formed a part of the common object, will not enable you to convict them
of the same offence. For instance, if
A, B, and C, at Manchester, enter into
a conspiracy to carry the Charter by
means of something they may effect, and
that at Duckinfield and Hyde otber parties combine to raise wages, and that
both happen to do the same acts, that
will not be sufficient to convict the parties at Manchester of the conspiracy at
Hyde and Duckinfield for raising wages,
although the parties in both places are
guilty of the same descripti4 of acts.
1 cannot too often repeat to you the necessity of giving your attention to the
evidence. You must always recollect
that it is to this the iidictment pointsthat the parties combined together to effectuate these illegqal objects. You need
not be satisfied that they met together ;
you need not be satisfied that any express terms were observed ; but that all
of them, in some form or other, were associated together for this common object.

365
associated together" I do not
,When1I say 4*
mean that each one must come in contact
with all the others, but that there was a
common object with them all. If not
satisfied of this you will acquit the defendants; if you are, you will find them
guilty. I have shown first what, the law
of conspiracy is, and what the indictment
is, and what the evidence is whereby such
an indictment may be substantiated.
You have heard the whole of the evidence
before, and it would be a very great relief to my mind if I could have felt, that
in justice to the public, to the Crown, and
the prosecutor,-who,in truth is the public, and in justice to the defendants, who,
in every case, but most particularly in a
case like this, in which there is so much
difficulty both of law and fact-at least
so much difficulty in clearly applying the
law to the facts of the case-in justice to
the defendants who stand charged on this
heavy indictment, I feel bound to do that,
which, in ordinary and shorter cases, I
seldom do-namely, to recapitulate to
you, at the risk, I am afraid, of being
very irksome and wearisome, the whole
of this evidence, that you may see, first
of all how it bears out the prosecution in
establishing a conspiracy at all, and secondly, if that be established to your
satisfaction, how it bears on each and
every individual, to prove on their part
a conspiracy, and to what extent. Gentlemen, recollect the first portion of the
evidence,-that which occupied the first
two days, or thereabouts, constituted
almost entirely evidence of this sort; that
in the manufacturing districts, namely,
Manchester, Stalybridge, Hyde, Duckinfield, Mottram Moor, Glossop, and thereabouts, early in August,-perhaps beginning in June, but generally beginning
about the 5th or 6th of August,-there
were a great number of meetings of a
more or less tumultuous character; and
at these meetings speeches were made of
a more or less inflammatory character, and
by a variety of speakers, some of whom
were connected with this conference of
delegates; and that the object of those
meetings was to excite the workmen to
quit their employment, and, undoubtedly,
not only to quit their employment, but
to force others to discontinue their employment, and threaten with violence
those who resisted it. Now that evidence,

on this charge, can only be given for the
purpose of showing by evidence a posteriori, the existence of a previous conspiracy to take part in those proceedings.
I have already told you how that evidence
bears on the indictment, but unless you
very clearly and distinctly see your way
sa as to infer, from those acts of whioh
they were guilty, a previous combination,
yo must not find them guilty. I now
proceed to call your attention to what,
after a lapse of more than a week, your
minds may not be fully possessed of. The
first witness was a man of the name of
Joseph Haigh, I shall make but very
few observations in the course of summing up this evidence to you. You saw
all the witnesses, and the degree of credit
which each is to receive at your hands is
a matter for your discretion. As a matter of remark, I don't think any of themI put out of the case the accomplices-intended to tell you that which they believed
to be untrue. I think one or two of them
give rather a coloured account. A man
of the name of Buckley, I thought, was
somewhat rather flippantand over zealous,
and his evidence did not possess me with
over credit as did that of others. Several
of the witnesses were quite respectable.
With regard to the policemen who gave
their testimony; the important situations
in which they were placed, the difficulties
they had to encounter, and the delicate
nature of their duty, require every sort of
allowance to be made for any little zeal
which they may have exhibited, and
which might lead them a little beyond, I
wont say truth, but a strict shade of
colouring. But with that observation I
must make this remark, that it certainly
does sometimes occur to me, that when
we afterwards come to detail matters
which have come under our observation,
we sometimes give them a slight degree
of colouring quite unknown to ourselves;
that is the only observation I shall now
make, and you will give it as much weight
as your own judgment leads you to do.
[Havingread the evidence ofJoseph Haigh
(the first witness) which, his Lordship
said, amounted to very little; and also
the evidence of Henry Brierly, his Lordship observed:] Gentlemen, I must make
one observation here; wherever you find
about the 8th of August, that the turnouts were discussing whether it woeald be

366
a Wage or Charter question, and that be able to draw a just inference as to the
differences existed among them on that part which speakers may have taken in
point, I think it rather looks the contrary any combination, the best way would be
way of having any expressed or implied to have an accurate transcript of a shortcombination among them. It does ap- hand writer's notes of every word and
pear that up to a later period there cer. syllable; an4the next best way is to have
tainly was very little like combination the general substance of what was said
among them. Some were for one thing from a person who heard it. But because
some for another. The one-armed man you cannot have that, it is not to follow
alluded to by this witness is, no doubt, that you are to shut your eyes to what
Cartledge, he has but one arm. I must you can have. You will not give
be under the necessity of calling your at- the same degree of attention to a party
tention, after I have gone through the though he tells yout fairly I cannot give
whole of the evidence, to that part which the whole, as you would to one who can
applies to each defendant. For it would give the whole, but Little says he has
be idle to suppose that you could carry taken down what he thought of consethe case of each in your mind; and, quence. A great number of statements
therefore, in the first place, you must be have been made respecting the words,
satisfied whether the general evidence will " Peace, law, and order;" I will not
enable you to come to a conclusion as repeat the observation which has been
to whether there has been a conspiracy. made, which must strike every man of
I have got an index to each person's case, common sense, that such expressions
and what I want you to do now is to see are nonsense if they are not in unison
whether or not, attending to the general with the general tendency of the publicharacter of the speeches made by the cation in which they appear. I do not
several speakers, you are led to the con- think that you are to-pay too much atclusion that there was a combination: tention to a few inflammatory words which
among persons going about from place to may be in a publication, if the general
place; and that they were not merely tendency of it is to promote peace and
guilty of violence on each occasion but good order. You should not pay too
that what they were doing was more or less much attention to a few hasty or unin pursuance of a combination among guarded expressions, if the general result
them. [Having read the evidence of be what I have stated. And, on the
William Clayton, his Lordship pro- other hand, you should not regard such
ceeded]: Then comes a witness ofgreatim- words as, " peace, law, and order," if the
portance,hecause he gives a much more ac- general tendency of the publication in
curate account ofsome of the preceding wit- which they occur be to promote violence
nesses, more accurate and more tobe relied or disorder. [Gentlemen, I am labouring
upon, because he is one of those who has under a severe cold, and have much difnotes of what took place;-Joseph Little. jiculty in addressingyou.] That closes
He acted as special constable of Hyde. the evidence for the first day. This evi[The Judge then read Little's evidence.] dence shows that in Ashton, Stalybridge,
There is a good deal in the speech of Duckingfield, and other places, in August
Leach, spoken to by this witness, which last, there were several meetings, and alis entirely irrelevant to the question be- lusions to other meetings, with excitefore you. All you have to do is to say ments to riots and violence; that someif there is any thing in it calculated to times it appeared as if the Charter was
lead you to the supposition that he was the object, and sometimes as if Wages was
a party to any combination. The witness the object. You will consider whether
says, respecting Leach, " He said a great or not, the persons going about then had,
deal more of which I took no notes.' or had not, entered into a combination
The observation upon this is, "Can you for the purposes charged in the indicttrust reporters who omit to take notes of a ment. The same style of evidence is folgreat deal of whatis said ?" All I can say lowed out the next day. [His Lordship
is this; if you want to know the general reads the evidence of Joseph Sadler,
character of a meeting, and particularly to Thomas Barrington,and William Moore.-

307
top
Th1 next witness is James Crompton, and if they told them it was through the '
He says, " I was on duty at Marple on shop,' (the government,) they must ask their
the 15th of August last; about 1000 masters to go with them as commanders and ser-

persons were there at a meeting: Taylor
was in the chair."

geants,and find them with bread and cheese on the

There are two road; and to go to the Duke of Wellington; and

Taylors', and one of these was in the
chair.

if that would not do to go to Buckingham Palace,
and the House of Commons, and the House of
Mr MURPHY:-My Lord, I have Lords, or whatever they have a mind to call it,
made a marginal note here, that that and demand from them to take all restrictions

Taylor was not indicted.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
My Lord, that is quite correct; that is
not the Taylor who is indicted.
The JUDGE:-I darsay that is
quite correct. I find thaftn my marginal references to all the cases there is no
reference to the Taylors. Joseph Taylor
is not in the indictment. It appears,
from this witness's evidence, that permission was given to Robinson to finish his
work. Parties took on themselves not
merely to stop the works, but to give
license to work. That is important; not
as establishing the charge of conspiracy,
but I think that the granting of licenses
to persons to work, is the strongest possible evidence that, but for this license,
they would not be permitted to do so.
Then comes a man who was examined
at great length, and who gives notes
of a great many meetings-Abraham
He dictated what he had
Longson.
seen and heard to a person then with
him, who wrote it down for him.
Now, you know that persons who refiesh
their memory with notes made, can only
do so with notes made at the time. Of
course you know that the quickest shorthand writer in the world cannot put
down on paper what is said till after it
has been uttered. This man put down
what he has given in evidence when the
matter was fresh in his memory. He is
questioned about the accuracy of his
recollection of what passed; but I don't
think that bears on the case; but if it
does detract from his accuracy, you are
at liberty to think so. He gives you an
account of Pilling, who gave that account
of his family which all of us, I am sure,
so deeply and sincerely felt:"After Wright had taken the chair, he pro.
posed, that whoever introduced any subject
not connected with that of wages should be put
down. he told them they must get their
wages, and if they could not, they must ask
their masters why they could not give it them;

off."
It would appear, from what lie said,
that he was connected with some other
political party in the country. I do not
see what that party has to do with the
question at all. I have not understood
what that introduction (made several
times) of the name of the Anti-corn
League, and other parties connected with
it-what it has do with the present question at all. However, you have it before
you, and it is quite competent for you to
give it what weight you think fit. " The
chairman said he would not go to London. They must take the responsibility
upon themselves, for he would not go to
London. James Allinson then got up,
and moved that the question be left open,
and let the meeting decide whether or
not they would get their wages or the
Charter. A person named Brown advised them to stick out till they had
their wages and their rights; and abide
by the question, and not meddle with
any other subject, for if they did they
would lose all their support."

Pilling said:" Fellow-townsmen, for I may so call you,
having lived amongst you so long, and having
been at so many meetings, by thousands, and
have been in prison-I do not know whether it
would be safe for me to own it or not; but I may
avow that I have the honour to be father of this
movement, and'the sole cause of your being la.
dies and gentlemen at the present time; for the
masters of Ashton had thought proper to offer a
reduction of 25 per cent. upon their wages. I
then caused the bellman to go round and call the
meeting, swearing, by the God of heaven, that, if
the reduction took place, we would annihilate the
system, and cause the day of reckoning. I then
addressed a meeting of 12,000. I then went to
Stalybridge, and addressed a meeting of 10,000.
I then addressed a meeting at Hyde of 10,000,
and at Duckinfield of 5,000. At every meeting
they came to a resolution to work no more till
they got the same wages as they had in February,
1840. He then said he addressed a meeting at

368
Royton, who came to the same resolution. He
said he then called a meeting at Oldham, but,
there they were taken by surprise, and I had to
come back, with five other of the speakers against
me. In consequence of that, the people of Oldham were not out, but I was determined next
morning to go and drub them out. I went accordingly, and met them at eight o'clock, where
one of them attacked me, and I gave him a
floorer, and they all lay prostrated at my feet.
All the masters were then willing to give them
their prices but one of the Anti-corn-law League,
of the name of Bayley, of Stalybridge. In the
course of the last three weeks, I have addressed
upwards of 300,000 in different parts of Lancashire and Cheshire. We then went to Droylsdea
and Manchester, and the people of Droylsden
swore by the God of heaven they would not work
any more until they had got their price of 1840.
They then came to Stockport, and caused all the
mills to be stopped. You did not turn out as my
friend here stated. It was the Ashton lads that
turned you out; and mind one thing, if you do
go in, they will come over and give you a d-d
good hiding. They then went to the bastile;
but I did not consider that right; but this winter
we may all become thieves, and then the soldiers
and police will have to look after us; and that
will eat up the system, as there are more ways
than one of eating up the system; but, if the
Ashton lads had not been there, they would not
have known that there had been such a place.
The magistrates ought to have looked over such
a trifling thing as that, and not have committed
some to Chester. He said he had been in all
parts of South Lancashire, and at Burnley, Chorley, Bolton, Preston, Colne, Padiham, Clitheroe,
Todmorden, Blackburn. The two Tory members of Blackburn was a-gate of working patent
looms at 1d. per cut less than any other masters were giving in that neighbourhood, and
stopped 9d. per week for every loom. He then
went to Todmorden, and the worthy member for
Oldham was actually giving more wages for some
kinds of work than what they were turned out
for; and when the authorities and soldiers went
to him to protect his factory, he told them he
could do without them, as the arms of the people
were his protection; and when that ceased, he
hoped he should cease to live. He then said,
" There's that d--d rascal of a Marshall, and
that d-d bloodhound of a thief of a Jem Bradshaw; they are both particular friends of mine,
and I love them well, and they know it. But
you must be sure and stick out, and not go to
your work; for, if you do, the masters will crush
you down, you may depend upon it, and then the
Ashton lads will come over again, and give you a
d-d. good hiding; and don't you deserve it?"

He said, "But you
The 'crowd said, "Yes."
will not get off as you did before. Now, that is
intimidation; but I know the law of conspiracy,
and there never yet was a good thing got, but
some one had to suffer for it. But they may put
me in prison, for I don't care a d-n for being
within the walls of the prison."
He made a mistake. He finished by exhorting them to stick out. He said he
had a child who was dead a short time
since. I believe he said a child, or one
of the members of his family, I am not
certain. On the 17th a meeting was held.
on was in the chair. Wright
Wm.Willi,
was elected a delegate. Williamson addressed the meeting, and said those delegates that had been at Manchester would
come forward, and state what had been
done. John Wright addressed the meeting:" Delegates, chairman, and fellow-sufferers, I
am come back quite different to that I expected
I should have come back, but I have not received any information. But we were put dowp
by the authorities. I went to Tib-street for to
find the delegates, but I could not. I went to
Avery-street to look for them; and went to
several other streets to look for them, but could
not find them. At last we found them, and
saw from the placards on the wall that it was
dangerous for them to meet. We were admitted
into the room. There were the work-people as
we call them. There were seventeen delegates
to support wages, but the moment we entered
the room the meeting adjourned until to.morrow;
' And I could not tell
My Lord God from Tom Bell; '
but there was no delegate there for your benefit.
The meetings in Manchester are called illegal,
and this meeting is illegal; but when you get
your wages go to your work. But in Manchester
they will not go to their work until they get the
Charter. But I did not come here to deceive
you. But I believe there is a great many that
will go and creep under the gates before this
day month. We went for the wages we came
out for. For I don't care for no man, whether
he be fool or Dick. Mr. President, I hope thrat
no man will go from this meeting under any
mistake. But I will not deceive you, for I have
not voted this day. But the meeting was concluded for wages and the Charter, and both had
gone together."
" Fool or Dick," it is suggested, is'a
mistake for the names of two magistrates,

369
who go by the slang names of Hoole and
Dick. The only importance attached to
it is the suggestion, "How can you trust
to a man who is not accurate in giving
these names.?" [Iconfess such a mistake
would not in my estimation lead me to
doubt the general accuracy of the state.
ment. It is only a mistake as to a letter.
[His Lordship read the remainder of
Longson's evidence, and also the evidence
of John Robinson Scott, and Silvester
Faraday.] You may infer from the evidence of Faraday, that all the mills were
stopped pretty much in the same way. I
think I am called upon also to remark,
that, although a great deal of violence
was manifested in stopping the mills, yet
we must not infer that all the people who
turned out of the mills were turned out
against their wills; on the contrary, it
,appears from the evidence that a large
portion of the work-people were glad to
be turned out; some, no doubt, were sorry
to be turted out; others were not; but
we have no direct evidence who were
acting from their own will, or who were
'acting from violence. All we can say is,
that there were some who did go out
willingly, and that others were turned
-out against their will. William Bentley, one of the county police at Rochdale, states that the Executive Placard
was posted there on the 17th of August,
and that he saw the Queen's proclamation posted at Rochdale on the
1th. The people returned to work about
the 20th. Then comes that witness whom
I told you, by his manner, was not
quite entitled to credibility, That, however, I leave to yourselves; I mean the
witness James Buckley. I do not say
that because he is a man of humble life,
but because, according to his own showing,
he was a person hanging about, and looking after the turn-outs to find something
against them. [His Lordship read the
remainder of the evidence for the second
day without comment.] Gentlemen, that
closes the evidence given on the second
day. On the following morning a gentieman came before you who gave an excellent character of Crossley. Another
witness was called to show the accuracy
of Little, and prove that his book was
not an invention. The next witness, John
Brooks, was called to show that the people were turned out forcibly. This was

intended, no doubt, to meet the challenge
thrown down by Mr. O'Connor, that the
mill-owners were to blame. One of the
defendants, who cross-examined this witness, said, that if a man produced twenty
pieces of cloth twenty years ago, he got
much more for it than a man would get
for double the quantity at present, and
that therefore the workmen were not as
well remunerated for their labour as they
were twenty years ago. But the witness
says, "That is not the fair way of putting
it, because he produces a great deal more
now by reason of the improvements in
machinery; estimating wages by the produce is not the fair way, but by the number of hours in which the labourer is
employed ; that is the fair way of putting
it, and by that rule the workmen got at
least as much more." But I do not say
that that is, or is not, true. I should say,
as a juryman, that the weight of evidence
is strongly that the workmen are now
getting much less wages than formerly.
That, however, has no earthly bearing
upon the point of law. It may be hereafter, if any of the defendants are convicted, and that the Court has to inflict
punishment on them-the degree of suffering and temptation to commit the
crime may-(I do not say it will)-have
an influence in mitigating, or exaggerating, the degree of punishment for entering into any such combination. The
next witness is James Bradshaw, a millowner of Stockport. I supppse this is
the man to whom Pilling alluded, whether
in irony or joke, when he spoke of his
friend "Jem Bradshaw." [Is Lordship
then read the remainder of the evidence
adduced the third day.] That is the evience of thefirst three days. The evidence is
then of a different class altogether, and
the object of it is, to connect the conspiracy (if conspiracy there existed) in the
disturbed districts, with certain persons
assembling in Manchester, at Scholefield's
chapel, including Mr. O'Connor, M'
Douall, and several other persons, as the
originators of it, or as having joined it after others had set the matter afloat. Whether the evidence does that or not I leave
you to determine. The evidence of the
first witness, [James Hindley, p. 9, 4th
day] proves nothing at all. His Lord.
ship then read the evidence of Robert
Bell, [p. 10.] Thomas Noblett, [p. 15.]

370
and Agnes Mary Noblett, [p. 28.] Gentlemen, that evidence is adduced to lay
the foundation for other evidence which
may bring the matter home to the Chartist delegates. This evidence shews that
Mr. O'Connor arrived in Manchester on
the morning of the 16th, and wentto Scholefield's house. Then it is shewn that there
was a meeting in the chapel that evening.
The delegates tried to take a room at Noblett's house,but finding theroom unsafe, no
meeting takes place on the 16th, (Young
Scholefield,who was called yesterday, gave
a rather different account) thatislaidas the
foundation. Now with that foundation I
will lead you to the testimony of another
witness--Cartledge-on whose testimony
the case very mainly-not mainly, but
very mainly, rests against the defendants.
Now, Cartledge was himself a delegate,
and certainly an active Chartist. As a
delegate at some meeting he was taken in
custody, and brought here on the same
charge as the other defendants. He comes
here with all the odium attached to his
testimony which can attach to a person
who has betrayed his former associates.
He says he does so because they illtreated his wife.
It may be he has
thought that what he was doing is wrong,
and that what he is now doing is right.
He may be telling truth, or falsehood;
and you will have to see whether his testimony is confirmed by, or contrasted
with, the testimony of others. Whether
you think the man more or less respectable is not quite material, but it may lead,
you to theinference whether you can
safely trust him. You will now hear
what his testimony is. I must also tell
you this, that he was one of the parties actually included in this indictment; but in
point of law that difficulty has been, in
my view of the case, got over, because he
has been acquitted. It was thought that
a nolle prosequi had been entered before,
but as that was found not to be the case,
he was acquitted. He comes here with
the odium attending him that he was
one of the very parties accused, and he
gives his testimony as the price of removing that accusation. If that induces you
to take his testimony here it is :-[Reads
Cirtledge's testimony.]
Mr. MURPHY . - I am sure, my
Lord, you will excuse me for interrupting you. At the end of my cross-exami-

nation ofCartledge, I have got a quotation here-the last one of all-which does
not appear to be in your lordship's notes;
-" I cannot say whether the resolution
was put to that meeting, that the majority
should govern the minority."
The JUDGE:-I did not think it necessary to take that down-what a person
cannot know. I think it is troublesome
enough to take down and read over all
that is material. If a person says, " I
cannot say"-then de non existentibus
et de non apparentibus,eadem est ratio
It is quite cldhr that every thing Cartledge says that bears in favour of any of
the defendants, may be taken as strongly
in their favour, for he comes here for the
prosecution. Cartledge speaks of a placard issued by the trades delegates, but I
don't believe that that document is in evidence.
,
S, Mr. O'CONNOR:-No, my Lord, it
is not in evidence.
The JUDGE:-The Executive Placard, which was in the hand-writing of
M'Douall, was sent to Turner to be
printed; and in order that this may not
rest on the testimony of Cartledge merely,
two apprentices of Turner's are produced.
[Reads the evidence of George Barlow
and Thomas Sutton.] That evidence
goes to show this, distinctly, that four of
the defendants constituted part of a body
of five, called the Chartist Executive
Committee. One of these was M'Douall,
and he sent the MS. of that document
which goes by the name of the Executive
Placard to the printer's, and a proof of it
was sent to M'Douall, then at Leach's
house, for correction.
The meeting
called the Chartist delegates took place
at Scholefield's chapel, where the resolution and address in question, the particulars of which I have not yet called
your attention to, were carried unanimously by a majority of some thirty or
thereabouts. One of the persons who
addressed -. the delegates was a person
named Brooke. This gos to show that
the delegates are not only implicated as
delegates, but in other ways. For this
purpose they call John Heap, the constable of Todmorden, who proves that he
arrested Brooke in his house, and found
some papers on him. These papers are
exceedingly difficult to decipher. I deciphered a good deal of them. They

371

evidently show that Brooke was at the as delegates. The meeting adjourned to
meeting of delegates. In that way the Carpenters Hall. The chair was taken
notes are material. It is impossible not
to see, from the way in which the notes
are taken, that he was there at the time.
This conclusively shows, as far as it goes,
that Cartledge's testimony is true. You
cannot fail coming to the conclusion that
Brooke was at that meeting. [His Lordship then read the evidence of William
Heap, James Wilcox, Samuel Shepley,
Henry Lees, Robert Newton, and Thomas
Rhodes.] Some doubt was at first entertained about Lewis's hand-writing, but
the letters produced in evidence, purporting to have come from him, were at least
established beyond all doubt. On Monday the'first witness called was Edwin
Sheppard, superintendant of police for
the Blackburn lower division. [Reads
his evidence.] I don't see that that carries the thing out at all; it does not affect
any of the defendants. It merely proves
that violence was 'used, more or tess, in
turning out the hands. Then comes an:other important witness, that is William
Griffin, the reporter. He stands exactly
in the same situation as Cartledge; I
think, perhaps, in a less creditable situation, because from some of the evidence
given on Saturday, something appeared
that led to the conclusion that Griffin
was actuated by personal and malicious
motives towards the persons against
It is quite
whom he gave evidence.

certain he was, like Cartledge, taking an
active part in the Chartist movement;
and it is also quite certain that he now
comes forward actuated by motives more
or less malicious towards one or other of

the parties. The question is, does that,
or does it not, lead you to doubt what he
Zsays ? with that observation I will leave

it. [Reads Griffin's evidence]. Gentlemen, the next witness is a witness who
gives you some account of the meeting
of-trades delegates. There was a meeting, you know, of the trades delegates on
the 16th. The witness, John Hanley, who
was then reporter to the Mfanchester
Guardian, was there. He says "there
was a meeting of the trades delegates held
at the Sherwood Inn, Tib Street.
Alexander Hutchinson was in the chair.
Charles Stutiart was Secretary. Scrutineers were appointed to examine the
credentialsof those presenting themselves

at one o'clock. P. .Present many of the
Some were Chartist deledefendants.
gates and some were not. M'Cartney,
John Leach of Hyde, George Candelet,
Augustus Frederick Taylor from Royton,
Dav:d Morrison, William Woodruffe,
and Albert Wolfenden from Ashton,
were there. Speeches were made. Duffy
complained that the Anti-corn-law League
was the origin of the disturbances. On
the same evening a tea party took place in
Carpenters Hall "-you must bear this in
mind that this tea party had a reference
to the celebration of Hunt's monument.
The procession was put off, but the teaparty took place as was originally projected. Well, if it was merely a social
tea-party it may be supposed to have
passed off quietly, as no one would go
there without paying, and thus persons
likely to create a riot would be excluded.
Scholefield addressed the meeting and
said "your day is coming, and when it
comes it will come with a vengeance."
He told them to enjoy themselves, and
that after sorrow comes pleasure. Having
read the evidence of this witness respecting what occurred at the meeting of delegates on the 16th at the Hall of Science,
his Lordship observed : - M'Cartney
cross-examined him, and asked him if
the speeches generally did not inculcate
a respect for property, and were not of a
peaceable character; the witness said
there was one exception; the speech of
Candelet. When I look at what did take
place on that occasion I certainly
think that that is a statemdhit calculated
to put you on your guard as to how
for you should give implicit credit to
what a person states to be the result of
what he hears. George Candelet is
represented as desiring the people to go
to the hills, and take possession of the
crops. Now that may be the construction of what he said, but it is not the
necessary construction of it. For, on
referring to the notes, it will be found that
the expression may mean that there was
plenty of crops to maintain the people.
-" If there were better laws, and a better system of legislation; if capitalists
would not be entering on injurious speculations, if there were more educated people
to regulate these matters, there is plenty

372
of provisions in the country to maintain cannot be amenable to any charge because
us." I do really think it may bear that they avow themselves to be a meeting of
construction.-" There is plenty of pro- delegates. It was said yesterday, that
duce in the country to support every such meeting was illegal ; on that I exbody if we only had such laws as would press no opinion. On that there may be
bring that produce within every body's some doubt. Allusion has been made to
reach".-That I think is a fair construc- what was said by the Attorney-General
tion of the words. I mention this because when addressing a jury on behalf of perit will serve as a warning to you, that we sons under a charge of high treason. I
cannot always put implicit credit in think what he said there was what every
statements of results [Reads the evidence one must feel as to the legality or illeof Matthew Maiden, Samuel Newton and gality of meetings for discussion. What
James Whittam] I don't place much numbers can make such a meeting illecredit on this threat to repel force by gal; what quantum of organization and
force which Whittam speaks of-" We arrangement, what deputations from one
have four double barrel guns, and some to another-what quantum of any or all
single ones"-now I don't think much of of these makes a meeting illegal, is a
that, it is absurd. You will remember, I question that must depend wholly on
dare say, some of you, some evidence that degree. It is very difficult to lay down
was given on the trial of Watson for con- any rule a priori, and, therefore, I will
spiracy twenty-five years ago, when it not encumber the present sufficiently enwas stated that some three or four persons cumbered case by stating what my view
marched up with a pistol and dirk to take of the law is on that point. All I shall
the Bank and the Tower. This is just as say is, that some of the defendants assemabsurd. It is hardly serious; it really bled at Scholefield's chapel as Chartist
may be a joke. What is material in the delegates-for of that there is undoubted
evidence is, that it shows the truth of and uncontradicted evidence-but if they
what Cartledge and Griffin have stated. did nothing else than that they are guilty
[His Lordship then read the evidence of of no crime whatever of which we can
Grattan, M'Cabe, take cognizance. Therefore if the AtCharles Slorack,
that
Issachar Thorpe, Peter Jamieson, William torney-General fails to satisfy you then
was criminal,
Barker, James Rothwell, George Roberts, what was done there
and Henry Rhodes, p. 104.] Gentlemen, he fails to bring them within the scope of
has been a great
I have not called attention to the docu- this indictnent. There
ments read. The principal ones are some deal of discussion about the right of those
concerning Scholefield; and others con- parties to vindicate their opinions respectcompecerning the meetings of delegates, and ing the Charter. It is perfectly
to say, he professes
the resolution passed there. The Execu- tent for any body
by ballot, and
tive placard and the address were passed annual parliaments, vote those matters.
universal suffrage, or any of
there. I have not yet called your attention
hearing it
to them; I will do so when I call your at- I will say I was ashamed of
of each defendant. urged that every one had that right. I
tention to the case
The circumstances of the defendants you will not say I was ashamed when pressed
but when it
have heard and I would rather that you forward by the defendants,
impressions from was pressed forward by others,-it is a
would take your own
educawhat they said. A great number of them shame to assume that any one of
one
are only charged with being present at tion held a contrary opinion. Every
don't deny had a perfect right to his own opinions;
the delegate meeting, and they
changes inexpeit-they rather boast of it. And if they one might thinksuch
that the fair result of dient; and another might think them
satisfy you
that a man
what was done at that meeting, was expedient; one might think
and
not at all to bring the people fairly with such notions was a hare-brained
it was crack-brained enthusiast; and the other
within this indictment--that
with him
not at all to excite persons to vio- might think those who differed
did
lence, in order that the Charter might grossly dull and blind, and that they
of the land, or to en- not see so far as himself. But can any
become the law
as not to see that that is
courage those that were so doing, they body be so blind

373
not what the defendants are indicted for.
Why, supposing the change the most
desirable that could be conceived; suppose it had been a combination to cause
the abolition of slavery, (which took
place some three years ago,) or to cause
a better Sabbath observance, or any the
most innocent measure that could possibly be conceived,-it would, exactly in
the same way, be within the scope of this
indictment, if they tried to effect that by
ithin
illegal means; or if,' the fifth count,
the conspiracy to force those who had
voluntarily left work to remain out, were
criminal, as upon this indictment I shall
certailly assume it to be. Accordingly,
all that has been said about this being an
indictment to put down the Charter is a
natter that I may dismiss without any
further observation. You must also dismiss from your consideration that, which,
to my own mind was of a painfully
,exciting nature. Several of the defendants, one in particular, had described, in
the most affecting terms, the trouble,
suffering, and privation he had undergone; which he attributed (rightly or
wrongly) to the non-introduction of the
Charter as the law of the land. He has
not had the advantages of good education,
and those who have had that advantage
think the remedy proposed is absurd.
Still there must be great compassion for
those who, whether they entertained right
or wrong notions, probably entertained
them quite sincerely; and he was driven
to suppose that, from some reason or other
which he could not investigate, he is in a
state of abject poverty, while he sees
others around him rolling in affluence.
What was done by him under that excitement must bespeak for him every
favorable consideration possible, even
though considerations of that kind, I
must tell you, have not the slightest
bearing on the question, which is, not
whether the defendants have a right to
look for high or low wages, but whether
they, or any of them, were parties in a
combination such as *as charged in the
indictment. If they were, and were convicted, perhaps hereafter, when the Court
has to punish them, the circumstances of
the misery they have had to undergo, the
almost madness to which they were
driven, may have a favorable effect on
Sthe mind of the Court, in assigning their

punishment; but it cannot have the
slightest effect on your decision as to
whether they are guilty or not guilty.
With regard to one of the defendants
(Woolfenden) he insists, that it is not
true that he ever made at any of those
meetings any speeches on the Chartist
question. When you consider that you
will always bear in mind the observation,
that it is very pasible that reporters may
make all the difference, where they do
not give the exact words of the speakers.
That being the case on the part of the
prosecution, I have now to state to you
what is the case on the part of the defendants. The first defendant calling a witness was Scholefield; there is no pretence
he had anything to do with this, except
his going to a meeting at Carpenters'
Hall, where he said some words to the
trades delegates, and lending his chapel
to the Chartist delegates, and occasion.
ally passing backwards and forwards
through the chapel to and from his house
while the conference was sitting. That
is all that is against him. His defence is,
" It is quite true, I was an active party
in the erection of Hunt's monument; it
was in my burial ground the monument
was erected. I knew most of the parties
concerned in its erection; I put off the
procession, lest it should lead to a disturbance. I knew Mr. O'Connor for several years. I lent him my chapel because
I thought that in a public house he might
be molested, and that he would be more
quiet in my house, because it was more
out of the way. It had been arranged,
five weeks before, that the delegates should
meet. There was nothing illegal in their
meeting. That is all I know about it;
they met for a legal purpose, and to implicate me in any thing they did afterwards would be out of the question."
The fact of his saying that Turner was
arrested is nothing but what any person
might do under the circumstances. His
Lordship then read the evidence of William Scholefield, John Northcote, John
Brooke, John Cockshot, and Henry
Holland. This witness is called to shew,
that the general tendency of Mr. O'Connor's addresses to the people was not
calculated to create any excitement, but
on the contrary was calculated to preserve
peace and good order. That was much
insisted upon by Mr. O'Connor. I must

f374
y I never heard much of Mr. O'Connor's speeches in that place--(the House
of Commons)-where I once sat with
him. At some public meetings out of
doors I may have heard him, but I must
take my account of his speeches from the
evidence. I think, however, it is a fair
inference, that Mr. O'Connor has strongly
inculcated the Charter, and that that was
the only remedy, as he supposed, for the
evils of the people; but that that had
'teen accompanied by general directions
to them to preserve the public peace and
order, and to respect property on:their
own account; and that unless they did
that, they never could hope to obtain the
,Charter. I thilik that is a fair inference
from the evidence given. You are, however, to judge for yourselves of the tendency of Mr. O'Connor's speeches. The
evidence of this witness (Holland) is only
receivable in the nature of evidence to
character. [His Lordship then read the
evidence of Sir Thomas Potter.] The
general tendency of his evidence is this,
.that he was acting as a magistrate in
Manchester, and that he did not witness
any violence, such as we have heard had
taken place. He is a magistrate, and a
gentleman of considerable age but his
stating that lie did not see any violence,
is like the old joke of the person
proved by one witness to have stolen an
article, because lie saw him, and who, in
order to -disprove that evidence, called
half a dozen persons to swear they did
mot see him take it. There can e no
doubt that violence was connected with
the turn-out, and the evidence of persons
wvho did not see it, is no proof of its nonexistence. The evidenice of the violence
seems to have been most distinctly made
out. But if you are to deduct from the
turn-out the violence of turning out the
people, forcibly expelled-if you do not
take that into account, then there has
been exhibited throughout the whole of
this county, a most striking and most creditable absence of violence. I had the
honour'of being one of the judges at the
special commission at Stafford; and the
acts perpetrated there were infinitely
m-ore terrible than here, although the distress, as far as I could learn, was not so
great. But, even there, th c'e was ample
evidence to satisfy my mind of the great
moral advance in th least educated and

most suffering parts of the population of
this country; because, even there, there
was a steady absence from personal violence, though not from violence, as to
property. There were some statements
of their getting bread from the shops, but
to a very small extent. But here I have
discovered a studied abstinence from all
violence, except that-which I do not
hesitate to call gross violence-the violence of forcing people to abstain from
work. If you can come to any moral
code, whereby you can deduct that from
violence, then there was none here. [In
Lancashire.] There seems to have been
a singular, and I think creditable ahstinence from all violence except that, and
when I except that, I-except that sort of
violence which I consider the most intolerable that can be practised. For though
I said in the outset of my remarks today, that I concurred in the wisdom of
the legislature, in having passed that act
of parliament which gave to the workpeople the fullest power to combine together not to work for less wages than their
labour was worth; yet I see also the wisdom of the legislature in making it a
highly penal act for one workman by
threats or intimidation to compel another
to take the same view of the value of his
labour which others take. If the effect
of alllaw be to protect property, is there
any kind of property which ought to be
more protected, oror or the violation of
which a greater punishment should be
inflicted, than labour, the property of the
working man ? I say, that the act of
those who compel others to cease from
work, because they think it will have the
effect of causing a rise in wages, is violence of the grossest description. But
the working classes had a vague notion
that what they did was in accordance
with the wishes of those that were affected
by it. Butr, making allowance for the
feelings of those persons, I certainly say,
in conformity to the testimony of Mr.
O'Connor in th address he made to
you,-I do think, if I am to judge of the
outbreak in this county by the testimony
given in the course of this long trial,
there was a singular and creditable abstinence from violence. [Having read the
evidence of Alderman Chappell, his Lordship observed :]--He said the manufacturers had no prof for three years. I

375
don't think that evidence tends much to
shew, what one of the defendants suggested, that the manufacturers are hardbearted. It only shews that they cannot
sell their goods for that which would enable them to give higher wages to their
workmen. Instead of hard-hearted manufacturers it might be hard-hearted purchasers who will not enable them to give
the wages required. The manufacturers
cannot force people to buy their goods,
and they cannot employ people to make
them if they cannot sell them. That is
an observation which I would rather not
have made. I consider it as stepping
out of way. His Lordship then read the
evidence of James Kershaw, mayor of
Manchester, and Isaac Clark Pray. The
evidence of Pray was to shew that as he
opened all the letters addressed to Mr.
O'Connor, private as well as public, nothing of a private conspiracy was going
on. My own impression is, that no letters of that nature were addressed to Mr.
O'Connor. It is not the course of the
prosecution to charge him with anything
of the sort as far as I can see. The
judge then read the evidence of James
Halliday, Titus Brookes, and John Farr.
Farr's evidence shews Mr. O'Connor to
be a kind-hearted man, and deservedly
popular among the peasantry, as one
who treated them in a kind manner
and took an interest in their welfare.
Having read the remainder of the evidence for the defence, his Lordship proceeded :-Now, Gentlemen, that is the
evidence on one side and the other, and
it now becomes necessary for you to consider the charge applying to these defendants, namely, that they combine together to cause a forcible strike and
tumult, and thereby to carry the Charter
into law; or that, others having done so,
these defendants combined together to
assist them; or that, these parties combined together, to encourage others to
stand out on a voluntary strike for wages,
without force, until the Charter became
the law of the land. How does this evidence apply to implicate the defendants,
all or any of them, on such a charge ?
I told you in the outset, that in order to
convict parties of such a charge, you
must show such acts perpetrated by them
as indicate such a complete union of
design as makes it impossible not to see

that there must have been some combination beforehand; not, perhaps, all
meeting together, but one saying to another, " Well, we will go to such and such
a place, and we will get John Smith to
go to such a place, and do so and so."
It might be proved, either that such was
the case, or by distinct testimony of meeting, combining, and arranging to carry
such things into effect. I have told you
at the outset that the evidence applying
to one portion of the defendants is of one
character; and that that applying to another, and a large portion of the defendants, is of a contrary character; and
both kinds of evidence apply to some.
Gentlemen, I have turned anxiously in
my mind what will be the mode of putting the case relative to each of the defendants so as to lead to a satisfactory
result, and after much consideration I
have come to the conclusion that the best
course will be, first of all to put in what
evidence there is as to the case of those
persons against whom there is direct evidence, if I may so call it, of conspiracy.
I will state to you what the evidence is as
to them. There is a little discrepancy
in the evidence as to some of them, but,
generally speaking, the evidence as to
some of them will be almost the same.
I allude to those who, it is alleged, were
present at the Chartist delegate conference
on the 17th of August, and then, next, to
those (which will be a differeintconsideration) who were present at the trades'
delegates Conference, on the 16th and
16th. At one time I thought it might
be a better course to have gone through
with the evidence affecting each defendant
separately, from beginning to end, but it
is not necessary for the ends of justice,
and, in truth, it may not be so satisfactory a mode; for if I were to begin, and
go through them, alphabetically, I would
have to jump from one consideration to
another in order to ascertain whether
such or such a man was at a certain
meeting on such a day. I will not receive
your verdict as to any till you are ready
to give it respecting all. I intended
to follow the example of Lord Chief
Justice Tindal in Stafford,who,in a case of
not nearly the same difficulty or coimplexity as this, put into the hands of the
jury the names of the defendants, and
then told the jury what was the evidence

376

affecting

each.

In that case twenty-six you find them guilty, it will be necessary

individIuals were charged with having for you to distinguish, whether in your

burned a house down. There was no
'difficulty as to the house having been
~bnrned; but the only question was whether it was proved that A or B was
concerned. I cannot do so exactly in
the present case, but I think I may
present it to you in a manner less ardu'ous, irksome, and laborious. Now, I
have, on this paper, a list of all the
persons mentioned in the indictment.
tHands the list to the jury.]
The
jury, at the request of the foreman,
obtained permission to retire for five
tninutes.
On the return of the jury his Lordship
proceeded :--Gentlemen, I was proceeding to tell you that the most convenient
I could take was to point out
what the evidence was as to a large
number of defendants, called Chartist
.delegates; next those who met, as trades'
delegates, at Carpenters' Hall. Now,
you recollect the charge is, that the
-defendants conspired to cause a violent
strike; or that, others having done so,
-they conspired to assist them, or that,
putting violence altogether out of the
-question, they endeavoured to persuade
others to abstain from labour till the
Charter became the law of the land.
If you find them not guilty of anything,
then, of course there is an end of it. If
you find them guilty of a conspiracy
cause the Charter to become the law
of the land, by violence,: (that is a short
word which you will understand,) then
it will be quite immaterial for you to
consider whether they combined to cause
the strike, or whether, others having
caused the strike, they combined to
assist them in their violent measures,
in order that the Charter might become the law of the land. There is no
possible question as to either of these
-things being equally criminal acts. There
is only a formal difference between them.
It is different, if you find that they are
guilty of endeavouring to persuade others
to stand out, without violence, until the
becomes the law of the land; for
although that is laid down here as a
-crime, and although I tell you to deal
with it as such, yet doubts may exist as
'to whether or not that amounts to a crime.
W1f that be the. only offence of which
then

-course

-to

,Charter

opinion the defendants originated the
disturbances, or only promoted that which
others originated. I do not find it necessary to request you to disgnguish between
the other cases, because they, virtually,
amount to the same thing. Now, with
reference to the Chartist delegates, there
is evidence incontrovertible to prove that,
previous to that week which began on the
15th of August, there had been what I
may shortly designate a forced strike for
wages. I have no doubt that Sir Thomas
Potter is right as to a great many of the
hands, that they went out willingly-perhaps rather wished to be forced out than
go out of their own accord, but it is quite
impossible not to see that that was not
the case with all, for it is in evidence
that some wanted to come back again but
the turn-outs would not let them. There
was a great number out on a forced strike
and some on a voluntary strike, but the
proportion of one to the other was extremely difficult to discover. That being
so, you have this established quite clear,
that a meeting took place at Manchester,
which was concerted six weeks beforeon the 8th of June: I allude to the
meeting of Chartist delegates. These
delegates met at Manchester certainly for
purposes unconnected with the strike.
They met by arrangement entered into a
considerable time before-for weeks before the strike was ever heard or thought
of. They came accidentally, and for a lawful purpose to Manchester, at the time
of the strike; just at the time when the
strike was at the highest, they came.
There is this body of delegates, and there
is, besides, another body called the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee calls a meeting. I will again call
your attention to the evidence of Cartledge and Griffin, which principally relates to this. The meeting was called.
It was at first intended that it should take
place at Noblett's public-house, as it was
thought that so many delegates would
not come as did come in fact. There
Nearly
was only eighteen expected.
double that number met. For that, and
some other reasons, Scholefield's chapel
is fixed upon for the meeting. They did
meet there. Certain resolutions are passed, and certain resolutions are voted.

377
T'he address is circulated through the
NorthernStar. Now, as against those delegates, against whom there is no evidence,
but their concurrence in that meeting, do
these acts, or do they not, bring them
within any of the charges contained in
this indictment ?-Does the evidence
show either that they originated, or does
it show that they remained together to
assist, the forced strike for wages till
the Charter became the law of the land?
Or thllat,by what they did, they encouraged
persons to stand out until the Charter
became the law of the land. In order
to enable you to come to a just conclusion on that subject, you must look
to what was the purport of the resolution and the tenor of the address, and
if you are satisfied that the fair interpretation of that address and resolution is to
encourage a forced-strike for wages, unquestionably every one who concurred
in that address and resolution is within
that count, which charges them with
aiding and encouraging the forced-strike
already in existence. Well then, if you
are of opinion that the fair tenor of that
resolution and address was to show that
the meeting did not encourage the forced
strike for wages, but merely that the
people should keep out till the Charter
became' the law, then you would find
them guilty on the fifth count only. But
all those parties who were present at the
conference, concurred in the resolution
and address. Now, what is the meaning
of concurring ? The resolution was put
to the vote, and carried, but there were
several objecting. However, it was said,
that there was some understanding about
the majority binding the minority. Now,
it was not necessary to say that, as that
is usual at all meetings. I cannot, however, lay it down as a proposition of law,
that everybody who is at a meetng, sinpliciter, is bound criminally by what was
done at that meeting. If, for instance,
at Mottram Moor 20,000 people assembled, of which I am one, and somebody
puts an absurd resolution ; suppose I
walk away, am I bound by that resolution, although I walk away and don't
think it necessary to oppose it ? If at
that meeting we all propose what we think
best, and that any proposition is carried,
then we are bound by that proposition;
and, it is not necessary to say, that the

majority are bound by the minority. IS
is not necessary to do that. That is the
ordinary mode of doing it. If you propose a thing and carry it, and that I
don't agree with it, then common sense
expects that I shall indicate by some act
that I do not agree with it. The resolution and address were practically carried.
A division took place, and that of itself
implies that the minority was bound by
the majority on this occasion. But, this is,
not left to mere inference, for, according
to the evidence of Griffin, it was said by
some one that the minority should be bound
by the majority. Though I do not like
to call in aid what any defendant said,
(a respectable looking man) something
that amounted to that-was it Harney,
or somebody else, who addressed you ?"I was against what was done, but still
I yihld to the majority." That must be
the fair meaning of all acts of that sort_
done at meetings consisting of a limited
number of persons, assembling to discuss,
any particular subject. In all cases the minority, unless in a strong and forcible manner they indicate that they oppose or dissent from the proposition carried, they are
bound by it, but here there was a decide&
acquiescence on the part of the minority,
that they would be bound by the majority,
although they carried certain resolutions
of which they (the minority) did not approve. That I think is a fair construetion, in point of fact, that the minority
are to be bound by the majority. I will
now call your attention to what Cartledge
and Griffin represent as having passed at
that meeting [reads the evidence of:
Cartledge and Griffin.] Now let us see-,
what the resolution of the delegates is.,
This is evidently the resolution, it was
circulated widely.
"Resolution of the delegates.-That whilst
the Chartist body did not origiiate the present
cessation from labour, this conference of delegates from various parts of England, express
their deep sympathy with their constituents, the
working men now on strike; and that we
strongly approve the extension and the continuance of their present struggle till the People's
Charter becomes a legislative enactment, an4
decide forthwith to issue an address to that effect.,
and pledge ourselves, on our return to our respective localities, to give a proper direction to~
the people's efforts."

378
Is that, br is it not, an act of encouragetentto the people then out upon strike?
Does it indicate that the persons who
passed that resolution had entered into an
agreement with one another, call it what
you please, to give encouragement to a
forcible strike, or a strike without force ?
For if it does, I must tell you clearly the
point of law, it is not the less a conspiracy because it was merely the offspring
of the moment, In order to constitute a
conspiracy, it is not necessary that it
should be anything secret. We read of
conspirators in melo-drama, meeting in
dark and gloomy caves at midnight, and
so on;-but, in law, a conspiracy means
the combining together. If, then, those
parties combine together, to aid and encourage others in this forcible strike, they
are guilty. It seems to me, certainly,
that that must be the consn'uction put
upon this, and not unreasonably, if you
adopt that view as being the fair con-

em ithin the less
r
doubtedl
mitigated count. The address is voted:
and it must be taken as a part of the
whole; and we must see what is paramount in the address. The address is
printed in the Northern Star, which
comes out at the end of the week.
It was circulated at the time, but, of
course, it was circulated at the end of the
week:"MEETING OF DELEGATES IN CONFERENCE AT MANCHESTER.
This body was driven by the troublous
times' from the consideration of the particular
matters and things for which it was sum.
moned."
Now, that is not evidence for the defendants; but it shows the truth of what
was stated, that they did not come with
any view relating to this resolution, but
for a totally different purpose:"The all-absorbing interest of the ' strike'

struction that all this means to indicate, movement was forced on the attention of its

on the part of the conference, their con- members as a first object of consideration. It
currence in the act of abstaining from being known that the sitting of this body was to
labour.

If that were so, it would bring commence on Monday, it was generally under-

them within that count of the indictment, stood and believed, that they would take up the
which charges them with encouraging the subject; and the decision to which they might
persons out on strike to A great deal
lapersour, but without force. abstain from come as to the course of action to be commended,
of stress has been put on the particular was looked for by hundreds of thousands with
wording of the resolution.

I don't think an intenseness of anxiety perfectly indescribable.

the fair way is to spin out from particular
words anything of criminality or innocence, but rather to look at the whole.
I confess I feel extreme difficulty, wishing
to do everything I can to point out, on
behalf of those defcndants, many of whom
have, no other counsel than the individual
now addressing you -

The conference commenced its session on Tuesday, at two P. m.I suppose that was at Noblett's house,
when Mr. O'Connor went up there at
one o'clock.
", continued, by adjournments, till about
and
seven on Wednesday evening. Their delibera-

I feel the greatest tions were, as might be expected, most anxious;

difficulty on earth in pointing out how
you can say, that a man who concurs
taken, at all events, thato
encourage tbe
to
people notall work till the Charter
comes the law of the land, and thus
bring them within the indictment. I
don't think it by any means so clear, that
the party issuing the placard meant to
encourage them to commit any acts of
violence, of which they had then been
guilty. That, however, is for you to say.
If the meaning is, " we issue an address
to direct you in the present struggle,"
meaning the forcibly compelling the
people to abstain from labour, that tn-

the discussions most animated and earnest, and
while some difference of opinion prevailed on the
course to be recommended to the people, one
soul and purpose seemed to animate the entire

assembly as to the necessity of enforcing, by
every means in their individual and collective
power, the observance of peace, law, and order
by and among the people. Each member, in
the first instance, stated to te conference, so
far as he had means of knowing it, the state of
his own district, and the opinion of his constituents in reference to' the strike.'
"A general, anxious, and protracted discussion then ensued upon the question Of adopting
the followin resolution:"--

379
I will not read it again, as I have read paralysed the hand of labour of the old and the
young. Yea, Infancy aid old age arealikein.
it aready.
":Every speaker was restricted to five minutes, struments in their hands for enhancing the in.
and no man allowed to speak twice on the same terests of their order. Willing still to labour for
question. An amendment was proposed, differ- a bare pittance, and watching entso cfully
ing resolution in phraseology, but
from the
ing from the resolution in phraseology, but which might lead to the attainment of your just
rights, and thereby render you independent of the
having the same purport. Another amendment I oppressor's will, you were cast upon
having the same purport. Another amendment
the wide
was proposed to the effect that-' The informa- world for support. Thanks-eternal thanks to
tion laid before this conference by the several the brave and independent Trades of Manchesdelegates of whom it is composed, does not ter! They saw the evil, and nobly threw their
warrant this conference in now recommending comparative comfort into misery's scale. They
to the people any national strike or holiday, or have struck, not for wages, but for principle:
in anyway mixing up the Chartist name and and, regardless of consequences to themselves,
movement with the present strike for wages, they have taken the foreground in your cause.
subsisting in some districts, and originated, as They have declared that they will cease to toil
this conference believes, by the Anti-corn Law till all labour shall be justly requited; which, ia
League ; not seeing any means whereby the said their opinion, dannot be effected till the Charter
League; not seeing any means hereby the said become law. Must not their names be handed

strike can now be made a successful effort for
the carrying of the People's Charter; while at
the same time this conference deeply sympathise
with their oppressed brethren on strike, and
admire the spirit of energy and patriotism with
luch the trades of Manchester, and other
places, have declared for the People's Charter,
and express their earnest hope, that the energies
of those bodies, and all other bodies of the
people, will be unceasingly continued with increasing ardour and determination, until the
creasing ardour and dermination, ntil the
enactment of that document be secured."

That was the amendment.
" After almost every member had spoken upon
the question, it was put, and the original resolution carried by a large majority.
" It is but fair to state that a considerable
majority of delegates were from the districts
actually out and taking part In the struggle,
After the adoption of the above resolution, the
following, address was agreed to, nern. con. The
mover and supporters of the amendment deeming it both unnecessary and unwise to maintain

becometolaw. Mustasnot their names be handet
posterity
patriots, sacrificing their
down
own convenience and comfort for the attainment
of that of their fellow-men ? Who can withhold praise from such men? You have not
struck-you have been stricken; but let the
stroke recoil upon the tyrants who have so
cruelly arrayed themselves against the interests
of labour.
"Brothers, these are not times to hesitate l
The corn has a golden hue while your visages
are pale, but hope for a change and better times,
We are fortunate in having an accredited executive, bearing the confidence of all, at our

head."
" They, too, have called upon you. You will
read their address: it breathes a bold and manly
spirit."
"We could not, in times like the present, withhold from them, your servants, our cordial support, as in union alone is security to be found,
and from unanimity alone can success be expected. This is not a voluntary '
holiday.' It
is the forced 'strike' of ill-requoed labour against
he dominion of allpowerful capital. But as

when seen to be powerless, might justly have the tyrants have forced the alternative upon you,
adopt it-and out of the oppressor's threat let
been considered to be factious."

Now, here is the address :ADDRESS OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE TO THE CHARTIST PUBLIC.
" Brother Chartists,-Those who have steeped
you in poverty, and accumulated vast incomes
by your labour, have turned upon you even in
your distress, and would plunge you yet lower in
the gulph of misery. Failing to purchase your
aid for the accomplishment of their own sordid
ends, they have effectually put into force the

freedom spring."
"While we have not been the originators of,
we are yet bold enough to say to those who adopt
the oppressor's remedy, stick to it rather than be.
come tools for your own destruction; and may
be who has a bit to spare, and would refuse it to
men struggling for their rights, feel the gripe of
hunger, and the still more stinging grief of a
crying offspring!"

"Brothers.-If we are worthy of your confidbotrine that "man has a right to do what he
likes with his own ;" and, in the hope of starving dence, we must prove that we merit your esteem.
you into compliance with their will, they have Hear us, then, and mark well our admonition

380

Let no act

of yours take the odium from those
who have goaded you into resistance, and who
would now torture you, because you do resist.
Be not d*eived; for although the discomfited
Whigs have attempted to rally their scattered
forces under this new pretext, yet will all of
their order in society, of whatever shade in politics, join with them in throwing upon you the
odium which belongs to your oppressors. But,
heed them not. Our's is the battle of labour
against capital-of poverty against property-of
right against might-of justice against injustice
-and of knowledge against bigotry and intolerance.
" This is a holiday, proclaimed not by nature
-- most unnaturally proclaimed; and may the
wicked fall into the pit which they have dug.
" Let union and peace be the watchword. We
counsel you against waging warfare against recognized authority, while we believe the moral
strength of an united people to be sufficiently
powerful, when well directed, to overcome all the
physical force that tyranny can summon to its
aid. The blood of your brothers has been shed
while peacefully agitating for their rights; and
the brave delegates of the trades of Manchester
have been scattered from their place of meeting
at the point of the bayonet; yet will the friends
of justice ever find a refuge as long as nature's
canopy stands, and so long as those for whom
they struggle stand by them. As the people
appear to have made the " strike of the League"
for a repeal of the Corn-laws, into a stand for
principle and the Charter, we would implore every
man loving justice and having a shilling at his command to advance it, upon the good understanding that free labour will ere long repay the loan.
" Brothers, the trades have issued a noble address. It breathes a spirit worthy of old laws and
old English liberties. This, brothers, is the time
for courage, prudence, caution, watchfulness and
resolution.
"In conclusion, brothers, we would, above all
things, counsel you against the destruction of life
or property.
" Remain firm to your principles, which are to
be found in the document entitled the People's
Charter.
"Men, be wise! do not commit yourselves or
your cause. Let all your acts be strictly legal
and constitutional, and ere long your enemies
will discover that labour is in truth the source of
wealth, and should be the only source of power."
Immediately after the adoption of the address,
it was resolved unanimously, "That the thanks
of the Conference be given to the Executive,
for their energetic labours on behalf of the
veople."

And it was then resolved unanimously--" That
And the
this conference do now dissolve."

delegates immediately dispersed to their several
homes."
That, gentlemen, is the address. If that
were a correct representation, there was a
perfect concurrence and acquiescence in
the address. I thought it right to read
the whole of it to you. A great deal of
it has no bearing upon the subject, but
there are certain passages that have, or
you may think they have, a considerable
bearing; such as, "They have struck,
not for wages, but for principle That is
a mere representation of this meeting,
that the strike was for the Charter rather
than for anything of any other character.
"We are fortunate in having an accredited executive, possessing the confidence
of the people. You will read this address; it breathes a bold and manly
spirit." It is an address generally to the
Chartist body, clearly in some sense approving of the other; but it may be a
fair question with you whether it is that
they mean to express approbation, and
consequently agree to encourage the
strike as a forcible strike, or whether,
finding that the people had been out, it
merely means to recommend them not to
work till the Charter became the law of
the land. I cannot suggest any interpretation which does not encourage them
to stand out till the Charter becomes the
law of the land, but whether it approves
of forcing the people out unlawfully, is a
question which I must leave you to decide.
At this meeting there were present four
persons, members of the Executive Committee, of whom it is said that they were
not delegates, but their being members of
the Executive Committee did not necessarily incapacitate them from fulfilling
the office of delegates. Bairstow was a
delegate for different placpes which he
It was said that James
mentioned.
Leach, though there, was not a delegate,
but he is one who, by all the evidence,
cannot be held otherwise than responsible for issuing this placard, be its effects
whatever they may, because the evidence
is such, if you believe Cartledge, whose
testimony is so much confirmed by all
the other circumstances, that is impossible to doubt what he tells you. Heywood gave a roll of paper to Cartledge,
who took it to M'Douall, who was up

381

stairs at Leach's house. He sent it down. dlusion but that of identifying them with
to be printed.

It came back for correc- it-though not, perhaps, with every word

tion, and is sent up stairs.

It is examin- of it. I will call your attention, now,

ed and corrected, and then Leach and
other parties came down stairs together.
It is then sent to the printer's, and afterwards issued as the placard of the Executive Committee. Just what has been
said about the meeting may be said about
the parties calling themselves the Executive Committee. This placard is seen
coming from the house of Leach, one of
the Executive Committee. A copy of it
is found in his house independent of the
one at the door, he is associating with the
writer of the placard; he is at the meeting when the resolution is passed approving of it, and saying that it " breathes a
noble spirit," and I think it would require
very strong evidence of dissent on his
part in order that he might not be implicated in the consequences of issuing it,
although it only comes from the hands
of M'Douall. It is not important to
prove that other members of the committee were cognizant of it. As to
M'Douall it is certain that he was the
man that wrote it and corrected it, and
there can be no doubt but that he is
responsible for it. It is plainly proved
and there can be no doubt of it. With
respect to Bairstow and Campbell, they
were both delegates at the meeting, and
certainly took part as far as the rest of
the meeting, and with the rest of the
meeting issued an address, in which they
pointed the attention of the public to this
as a spirited address, breathing a noble
and manly spirit. It is for you to say
whether, in your construction of the
meaning of the conference address, they
recognise and approve it, when they say,
that it "breathes a bold and manly
spirit." It is the more to be considered
the fair construction, as it seems to me,
when you recollect that at the time
they voted this address and resolutions,
they knew that the printer of this placard
had been taken up. M'Douall said it
was not for printing it that Turner was
taken up, but because he would not
give up a copy of it. At all events
they knew that this was the placard,
T
urner was
for the printing of which
arrested. This placard they approved
of, and represented as breathing a bold
and manly spirit. It seems to me that
you can l'ardly come to any other con-

to the whole placard, because it is necesRally round
sary to go into detail.our sacred cause, and leave the decision
to the God of justice and of battle."
I don't hesitate to tell you, that if there
was nothing more in this than that sort
of expression about the God of justice
and of battle, although it is very intemperate language, and very improper, I
don't think too much reliance ought to
be placed on that. People in excited
times, as was said by Chief Justice
Tindal, must not measure too nicely
the expressions in their speeches, and
certainly, though not with the same latitude of allowance, you must not measure
the language in written and printed addresses too nicely. The Attorney-General told you very properly, don't let the
flimsy gauze veil of such words as
" peace, law, and order," if the whole
tendency of the document be against
peace, law, and order, deceive you. I
say, just in the same way, if a placard
has no serious mischief in it, and merely
some expression which I dare say the
writer thought very sublime, it would be a
great deal too much to dwell with too much
minuteness on an expression of that sort,
in reference to a crime of that magnitude,
which you have now to consider. But
there are other expressions in this document which do not admit of the same observation. I can quite pardon the expression -" Leave the decision to the
God of Justice and of Battle,"-but what
is the meaning of this, which I marked
when the placard was sent up to me as
being, I must say, the worst part of
this address ? "Englishmen, the blood
of your brothers reddens the streets of
Preston and Blackburn, and the murderers thirst for more." That is only
vulgar and inflammatory; but, now, what
do you make of this ? " Peace, law
and order, have prevailed on our side."
That struck me as one of the most important statements in the placard, because
it led me to the conclusion that the persons who prepared and issued it did not
think it any breach of peace, law and
order, to commit the outrages of which
they must have been cognizant, and of
which charity itself could hardly suppose
that those who drew up this address were

382

not aware---namely, that great tumultuous
bodies came to this town, and forcibly
compelled persons to desist from work.
I do not say this is the necessary inference. I would always make very favourable
allowances for language used in excited
times. I would put the most favourable
construction upon it. It is possible that
all they meant was, (rejecting these words)
nothing else but calling on the people out
on strike to this effect-" Now that you
are out continue out till the Charter becomes the law of the-land." If that be so
it would only bring the parties within the
minor charge-a doubtful charge, and not
that one accompanied by violence. I have
pointed out what seemed to me the only
observations I can make on those three addresses, which are matters mainly bearing on the parties present at the conference, and against whom there is no other
evidence, excepting their being at the
conference. In this newspaper, not the
copy I am reading from, but in another,
there are statements of a great number
of outrages alluded to and read by the
Attorney-General,-instances of the very
outbreaks of which evidence has been
given, and other similar ones; and
also a long article which breathes, undoubtedly, a very peaceful spirit. I shall
not trouble you with reading what
you heard yesterday, about the outrages
and turn-out in Dewsbury and other
parts of the neighbourhoods of Manchester. There is an article which one of the
defendants wished to have read, and I
am sure you will give attention to it,
because one of the defendants mentioned
it as having found its way into the same
paper, and should therefore be taken in
connection with those articles relied on
by the prosecution. This article appeared
in the third edition of the paper of the
preceding Saturday, (the 13th of August,)
and was copied into the paper of this
Saturday, (the 20th of August,) headed,
" Further Progress." [The learned Judge
read the whole of the editorial article,
which appeared in the third edition of
the .N'orthern Star of the 13th of August,
and also in the first edition of the 20th.
We have given it in our report of the
proceedings of the seventh day, at the
close of the evidence for the defence;
it is headed, "Further Progress."] Gen-

one of the defendants thought it material.
You see it is plain that the same observations which have been made with reference to the other documents also apply
to that. Does it, or does it not, seem a
necessary inference, that it means to encourage anything more than that they
should remain out till the Charter became
the law of the land. I do not mean to
decide, whether it has one or the other of
those meanings. Gentlemen, that is the
documentary evidence as relating to those
defendants. That is the evidence that
applies to those, the twenty-four defendants who have been proved to be at that
meeting, and against whom no other
Amongst
evidence has been given.
these Mr. O'Connor is the first defend-ant. I am not aware of anything else
that affects him, beyond his being at that
meeting. The next of the defendants, as
I have got them on this list, who are
proved to have been at the meeting, are
Peter Murray, M'Donall, James Leach,
John Campbell, and Jonathan B4irstow.
That may be stated, I think, as being all
which really affects them. They are
proved to be members of the Executive
Committee, and therefore may be taken
to be the parties who issued that address,
though it would not follow that every one
is responsible for an address issued in
their name; but it will be for you to say,
whether it was not issued with their concurrence and approbation. The resolution clearly approves of it, and though
mer ly approving is not per se necessarily identifying yourself with the sentiments, it is impossible not to say, that
issuing an address approving of a placard
is pretty much the same thing as issuing
the placard itself. That is the evidence
against Mr. O'Connor, M'Douall, Leach,
Campbell, and Bairstow. Against Bairstow, the young man who made a very
powerful address to you two or three days
ago, there is this additional circumstance:
he said, if the Government did not take
up the Executive Committee, in fortyeight hours, they would not dare to do it.
I don't think that amounts to much. It
showed that he believed that great alarm
would be excited; but I don't think it
implicates him in the conspiracy any
more than if he had said nothing of the
sort. The next that I have on my list
tlemen, I read the whole of that because as amongst the conspirators there, so to

call them, is M'Cartney. Against him
there is other evidence besides--(I am
sorry I have not quite the use of my tools
here, but it is difficult being so late out at
night.)-Against him there is further evidence. He is proved by the witness Nathaniel Fryer, to have been at the Bridgewater works and at Eccles in the afternoon
of the same day, namely, the 11th, a week
before the meeting of the 17th, when' he
thus addressed the mob-" Fellow-slaves,
this is the beginning of the end; a struggle between rampant capital and prostate
labour; the struggle is strictly political,
and all work shall cease till the Charter
becomes the law of the land." I think heis
proved to have been one of the parties who
took partin the trades meeting, which took
place in Carpenter's Hall on the 15th of
August, when the chair was taken by
Alexander Hutchinson; but he is not
proved to have been there on the 16th,
when the resolution was passed. Then,
as to John Aitken, there is nothing
against him but being there at the conference, Richard Ottley, the same. George
Julian Harney, the same. Richard Pilling, the same. William Hill, the same.
Robert, Brook, besides being there, has
against him the fact, that in his possession
were found those papers, which prove nothing but that he was at the meeting; and
he is also proved to have made a most violent speech at Todmorden, after the meeting, in which he talked of ten thousand
men and the soldiers. He certainly
seems to have uttered sentiments very inThere is John Hoyle;
flammatory.
there is nothing against him except that
he was there. Norman and Beesley are
also mentioned. Beesley was apprehended with seventeen copies of resolutions
upon him. After all, having resolutions
amount to nothing, except as indicative of
what is proved by other testimony against
him. Samuel Parkes, the same. Thomas
Railton, the same. Robert Ramsden,
the same. Mooney, the same, except the
ridiculous story about the double-barfelled guns;--that may be left entirely out
of the question. John Leach, of Hyde.
Against him there is the fact not only
that he was at one of the meeting of the
delegates, but, you will recollect, that in
the early evidence, he was proved to have
been at meetings without end, at Hyde
and other places, beginning by treating

it as a wage question, but using the most
inflammatory and vulgar language, aS
to the quantity of provisions used by
I need not go into
the Queen, &c.
this. I don't think it would be useful
to go into detail, for you will probably recollect the style of his speeches.
He began by making speeches on the
wage question, and took part for that
against the Charter. About a week
after the turn-out commenced he went to
Hyde and Stockport, and in the latter
place headed a mob up to the workhouse to get the prisoners released. There
is no other evidence against him. Then,
as to David Morrison. There is against
him the evidence of Mr. Nasmyth as to
what took place at Eccles; and Fryer
also mentioned him as having been present at the meeting, and telling the workmen that they thought they were well off,
but they would soon find they were not.
Against John Arran there was nothing
but his being present. James Skevington, the same. Christopher Doyle, besides being present, is proved to have
been one of the speakers at Stockport. He
was also at a meeting at Noblett's house.
He was proved to be at a meeting at Stockport by the witness Moore, and at another meeting in Stockport by the witness
Crompton said-" I took
Crompton.
e said :notes of what Doyle said.
" Friends and fellow-workmen, we are not
met here this morning for any party object, but
for a national object,-an object upon which
depends your slavery or freedom. 'He then
went on with a great deal of abuse of the
government (I have not the particulars,) and
then said: perhaps you will want to know
from me how to get the Charter. You must
work no more till it becomes the law of the
land; and you that have money in the banks
and other places, must fetch it out, and stop the
supplies of the government. Then you will
make them glad to give you anything you
may want. You will, perhaps, want to know
how you are to get meat. Lord Kinnaird said, in
the House of Lords the other day, if he wanted
food he would take it where he could find it ;
now your tyrannical masters will have no ohb
jection to your doing what Lord Kinnaird said
he would do. I tell you, if you want food,
if
take it where you can find it, your masters
will not relieve ou." 'He proposed that

384
there should be no more work till the Charter
became the law of the land. That resolution
was put to the meeting by the chairman, and
there was a unanimous show of hands in favour
of it. After the resolution was adopted, Doyle
said,' " I see you are all Chartists, and there's a
meeting of Chartist delegates to day at Man.
chester, and you must elect a person to go
there." 'He then proposed that Mr. Joseph
Taylor, the chairman, should be elected. There
was a show of hands, and he was elected a delegate to go to Manchester. After he was elected
Taylor said he felt proud that they had elected
him as their representative.' " I tell you," said
he, " that you must stick firm one to another,
and work no more till the Charter becomes the
law of the land. I will go to Manchester, and
represent you there."
Now, gentlemen, that is the last, note
these names down. They are the first
twenty-four. There are other names to
which I can speak afterwards - the
trades' delegates.
Now the question
is whether the evidence satisfies you
that they are guilty upon either, or
,upon which, of the charges in this indictrmnent ? Does it satisfy you that they
either conspired to cause this forcible
turn-out and violence, so as to make the
Charter become the law of the land, or,
if you adopt that construction, that, there
being violence in existence, they conspired
to aid and encourage the parties in
carrying out that violence ? or you
cmay say that, as to all and some of
them, there is not necessarily such a
construction to be deduced from their
acts and documents; that all they meant
was to encourage the parties who were
actually out, whether right or wrong, to
remain out till the Charter became the
law of the land. That would bring them
within the minor charge-- the charge
contained in the fifth count of the indictment. If you think they are not
guilty, even of this, then you will acquit
them; but I confess there is a difficulty
to me to suggest such a construction to
you; but it is what you have a fair right
to do. You will consider it, and it is
the duty of jurors in considering acts,
where there is not a fair warrant to force
your consciencc to say something-if
you do not see your way as clear'as daylight-if the matter bears a double construction,--it is your duty to give it that

construction which is most favourable to
the prisoners. If the fair construction is,
that they meant to encourage nothing
more than remaining out till the Charter
became the law of the land, then find
them guilty of the minor charge; but if
you find, looking, as I have done with
considerable anxiety - looking rather
with the ingenuity of a practised mind
than that of an ordinary man, that their
acts are capable of the other construction,
and that you have no doubt as to their
aiding and encouraging a forcible turnout, then you will find them guilty of
the larger charge in the indictment. If
you have a fair doubt you will give them
the benefit of that doubt, and act ac,
cordingly. Gentlemen, I will not take
your verdict now. I will do as Lord
Chief Justice Tindal did. You will decide there, and when you do so, let me
know. I do not want you to give me
your verdict now, but to let me know
that you have decided.
One of the jurors asked for the counts
of the indictment.
The JUDGE :-Here is an abstract
of the counts. The fifth count is what I
The two last
call the minor count.
counts are entirely gone, and the four
first you will see, substantially, are the
same thing. They charge the defendants with encouraging violence to obtain
the Charter. The fifth count charges
them with encouraging them to keep out
without violence, for the obtainment of
the Charter.
A JUROR :---My Lord, we will not be
able to come to a decision, without some
consideration.
Mr. BARON ROLFE handed the
jury an abstract of the counts of the indictment.
The jury retired.
In a few minutes the foreman returned and asked his Lordship a question
in a low tone of voice.
The JUDGE:-It would not be
proper that anything like a private conversation should pass between us.
The FOREMAN :-I will only trouble you to tell me whether we can find
them guilty of conspiracy with violence,
or without it ?
The JUDGE :--Yes.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : -Violence includes intimidation, my Lord.

385
The JUDGE:-O, they understand morning. Taylor was sent as a delegate
to Manchester. On the 16th there was
The jury having deliberated for about another meeting a Royton, and there is
an hour, returned to Court, and signified evidence of Taylor's speech on that octhat they came to a decision on the evi- casion:dence respecting the twenty-four de" Ladies and gentlemen, we have arrived at
fendants whose names were submitted to one of the most important subjects ever brought
them.
out to the public. There was a resolution passed
The JUDGE :-I will now submit in Manchester, on Monday last, for the Charter
to you the evidence as against Bernard
to become the law of the land; and no doubt
M'Cartney, John Leach, George CandeTaylor, David but something serious will take place before long.
let, Frederick Augus
Morrison, William Woodruffe, and Al- He understood that the magistrates were sitting
bert Woolfenden. I put these together all day at the New Bailey Court House (Salbecause they were present at the trades' ford) ; and, about four o'clock in the afternoon,
delegates meetings in !Manchester, Mr. Beswick, one of the Manchester police, and a
M'Cartney, John Leach, and Morrison magistrate, entered the room (Carpenters' Hall),
were in the other meeting also. I will and told us our Meeting was illegal, on account
first read the evidence with regard to of the out-door pressure; and our chairman rethat which applies to all of them in com- fused to break up the meeting. They instantly
mon. It is clear from the evidence of John left the room; they allowed us ten minutes to
Hanley, who, in August last was reporter disperse, and no decision was come to at that
to the Guardian, that these defendants time; for, first-one nibbled, then another, but
were at the meeting of trades delegates on none would take hold. But I fearlessly tell you,
the 15th of August. With regard to one that I took hold of the grand question, to stand
of them (Candelet) he (the witness) cer- for the Charter, which met with loud applause.
tainly was too hasty, to put it no higher We had then only five minutes to disperse, and
than that, as to the meaning of what was we have a considerable portion of the work to be
said; for really what Candelet did say done to-day; and I consider that you have no
did not at all necessarily and fairly bear time to lose; there is
a considerable portion of
that meaning. [His Lordship then read the work to be done to-day, and if you wish to
the evidence of John Hanley.] Candelet,
you must say
Taylor, Woodruffe and Woolfenden, were have a hand in this undertaking,
both at the meetings of trades delegates something this morning; you have not a mo[His ment to lose; for the men must use the sword,
and meetings of the turn-outs.
Lordship read the evidence of William and the women will know where to direct them.
Clayton and Joseph Little.] Candelet As soon as the delegate from Birmingham had
seems to have been present at all the got the decision, away he runs to the train to
meetings at Hyde, and to have, at every take the news, and, doubtless, they would come
meeting, advised the people to remain'out forward in thousands to join our ranks, and betill the Charter became the law of the fore this day'eek there will not be one trade at
land. The evidence against Taylor is work; but I fearlessly tell you that I was the
that he was at that meeting at Carpenters' man that grappled the Charter at Manchester
Hall, where he certainly moved, or se- yesterday, and I would like to witness a bloody
conded one of the leselutions. John Ro- revolution, or resolution, I know not which."
binson Scott says Taylor was at a meetWhatever it was I should like to take it as
ing at Royton on the 13th of August. ' a bloodless ' resolution, as, probably, no
He addressed the meeting first about the
government in a very savage manner, and one would really talk'about a bloody revolution. With regard to Woodruffe, the
he damned the villainous system. He
said, " If I was the principal in this un- evidence against him is, that he was
dertaking I would never rest till I was at chairman of a meeting held in July, at
the top of the tree, and would scale the Ashton, where a person advised" The cotton lords, particularly the Messrs.
walls of that damned infernal place before this day six weeks." The meeting Reyners,, to keep within the precincts of their
adjourned till the Monday following when own palaces, as dark nights were coming on, and
they again assembled athalf-past six in the the reckoning day was at hand."

that.

386
Me was also at a meeting on the 12th of; think he took any prominent part.
(August, in Charles-town. John Alex- Against him the main evidence is, that
-ander Stuart was in the Chair. From he was one of the parties attending the
sixty to eighty people were present. trades' delegates meeting at Manchester.
Woodroffe said, he had a resolution to The speeches which he made at the meetpropose, to the effect, that it would faci- ings which he attended, seem to me to
litate the advance of the wages of opera- be characterized by great ignorance; a
tives, if all labour should cease till that sort of self-sufficiency and conceit, rather
advance were obtained. On the 14th he than anything tending to intimate any
was at a meeting on Thacker's-ground. previous combination, or conspiracy, such
He was also at a meeting in Stamford- as that charged in this indictment, Now,
[His gentlemen, that is the evidence against
street on the 13th of August.
Lordship then read the account of this 'these four parties; who were attending
meeting and procession, from the evi- various meetings, and two of them, Taydence of the witness Joseph Haigh.] I lor and Canmelet, moving and seconding
do not see much in that account of the resolutions at the trades' delegates meetprocession. Now, according to my notes, ing. . It is now for you to consider the
that is all the evidence against Wood- evidence affecting them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :roffe, except that he was one of the delegates at Manchester. I think in these Has your Lordship mentioned the name
-meetings there is very little. There is, of Cooper ?
The JUDGE :-Yes; he is in the
however, this circumstance, that he is one
of the trades' delegates at Manchester. list.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-We did
Whatever conclusion you may come to
respecting the Chartist delegate meeting, not hear the name.
The JUDGE :He
certainly the evidence has altogether,
is one of the
failed to shew that the Trades' Delegates twenty-four.
A JUROR:-Must we now decide
were a combination or conspiracy for the
same purpose. Woolfenden is spoken to upon.tbe evidence as to these four ?
by Henry Brierly as having been at a
The JUDGE :-Yes, I think you had
If ou think you can carry in
camp meeting in Glossop, where he began better.to lecture.--' He hoped the people would your minds the substance of the eviobtain the Charter, but he feared it would dence as to any more of them we will
not be obtained for sometime.' I don't tell you.
A JUROR :- My Lord, there are
think that makes much. Many are desi..
rous of speaking on such occasions, and three or four of us who have taken notes,
to a person who has a natural fluency, and I think we will have no difficulty in
which enables him to make a great out- giving a conscientious verdict.
The JUDGE :-Then there are two
pouring of words, it may be very gratifying, though it may be very irksome to or three more you may dispose of without
those that hear him. I don't think you difficulty. I will now read the list of
can infer much from anything he said at those that remain, (I believe twentythat meeting. You can gather little from four of them) against some of whom you
it that looks like combination or conspi- will find there is no evidence at all.
racy. He liked to get the Charter, but
''he AITORNEY - GENERAL:-.
he was much afraid it would be a long Any suggestion from your Lordship
time before it was obtained. Woolfenden would induce me at once to consent to a
is also spoken to by the witness James verdict.
The JUDGE :-David Ross; there is
Buckley. That is the man on whose
testimony there has been some sort of nothing against hbim. Now, you may
suspicion. He said there was a meeting strike him out as not guilty. James
on the 12th of August, at the H-aigh. Taylor: that may be struck out. Joseph
Woolfenden spoke much against shop- Clarke was not at all mentioned.
keepers, and cotton masters, ind the
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-He went
Government. Hie was proved to have been) to Turner's.
The JUDGE:-It was a man named
at some other meetings, but I do not

Clarke. It may be the defendant or
not. John Massey; he is not mentioned. Thomas Browne Smith, Thomas
Frazer, James Rasmith, James Chippendale, and John Lomax, have never been
mentioned.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-No.
The JUDGE:--Robert Lees; there
is a man named ' General Lees."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :Lees is proved, by more than one wit,ness, to be known as " General Lees."
The JUDGE :-A u are right in
pointing attention to that, for I have
omitted a note of it. In stating the case
pro and con, I would be glad to be
reminded of any such omission. Now,
gentlemen, I will call your attention to
one case which stands by itself; it is
that of Scholefield.
Mr. O'Connor,
who, for the purpose of the present
argument I will consider to be one of
the conspirators, goes to Scholefield's
house. That is nothing at all; the
whole evidence is, that Mr. O'Connor
went* there unexpectedly. In the afternoon Scholefield goes with a message
from him to Carpenter's Hall. I shall
not go into detail about Hunt's monument, it must be quite fresh in your
memory. There was to be a procession
and meeting in commemoration of Henry
Hunt, and Scholefield, in the most sen-'
sible and rational way, did issue placards
to stop the procession and meeting. Mr..
O'Connor went to Noblett's on the Tuesday afternoon, and having gone there he
found he was followed by an immense
concourse of people. He consequently
keeps within, and, in doing so, exercises
a sound discretion. He sends Scholefield
to the tea party held in Carpenters'
Hall in the evening: He goes there and
makes a sort of speech. lie said, " Your
day is coming, and when it comes it will
come with a vengeance." He told them
to enjoy themselves, and remember what
passed sixteen years ago, and that after
sorrow comes pleasure.
He said he
wasleaving the meeting to go and see
Mr. O'Connor. He then goes back. A
meeting takes place in the chapel that
night. There is no doubt of that. I
cannot think but the probable explanation is that this meeting iwas held to prevent any gathering. It does not show
that there was any conspiracy. I do not

think there was anything wonderful in
it, they having assembled according to
arrangements which had taken place long
before. Nor is it strange that Seholefield
should be there in the evening. It certainly seems from the evidence that Scholefield might be there. Young Scholefield said in his cross-examination that
Mr. O'Connor went to the chapel, and
that his father went to Carpenter's Hall.
When he returned he went into the surgery and remained with witness till ten
o'clock, when he (witness) went to bed.
He does not say that his father did not
go into the chapel after that. He did not
see the executive placard. The evidence
amounts to no more than this, that Scholefield might have gone in there after ten
o'clock that night. Now, the next day a
meeting is held in the chapel, and you
are to decide whether that should lead to
the conclusion that he approved of what
passed at that meeting. He, certainly,
cannot get over the fact that he lent them
his chapel. He knew they were coming
for a purpose which he thought to be a
lawful purpose, and accordingly he lends
them the use of his chapel. He lends
them a table. He passes in and out once
or twice during the day. This probably
is not conclusive evidence under the circumstances, perhaps not evidence at
all, to connect him with anything that
may have taken place at that meeting.
In my mind, it is extremely weak evideuce; at the same timne, you may come
to a different conclusion. The crime
charged, is combination or conspiracy to
upset the present order of things, either
by violence or without it. Is the evidence sufficient to fix such a charge upon
this defendant because some of the conspirators may come to Manchester-though with no such object-and borrow
his chapel, ivhere they are likely to be
out of the way? I do not see that, beyond that, there is the least intention of
secrecy; it appears to Ibe quite out of the
scope of their object, except so far as was
necessary to prevent tumult. But then
he states that Turner was apprehended.
He came in knowing that the Executive
committee were there, -and tells this.
Then, gentlemen, leaving out this great
list that was struck out, all the rest are
parties as to whom this general observation will apply; that, if you convict them,

388
it must be solely upon the ground of the
criminal acts in which the parties were
engaged. A participation in those acts
is certainly not at all conclusive proof of
-any participation in the previous conspiracy. Indeed the more ignorant, vulgar,
and outrageous parties are, and the
"coarsertheir speeches and conduct, to my
mind, I must own, the less probable it is
that they are carrying out any direct or
indirect plot in which they were more or
less participating. That, however, is a
matter for you to decide. The next defendant to whom I shall direct your attention, is Thomas Mahon. The first
witness that speaks to him is Brierly.
[His Lordship then read the evidence of
Brierly, and remarked that the same evidence would apply to Stephenson, Fenton, Crossley, and Durham.] All those
meetings on the Haigh, are Stalybridge
meetings, and all these parties attended
them ; some more, and some less. They
were all encouraging the strike for wages,
and it is for you to say whether you believe, from their conduct, that they were
engaged in any such conspiracy as that
charged in this indictment. The next
witness who speaks to these is Buckley,
to whom I have already adverted. He
speaks of meetings at Hyde, where Crossley, Fenton, and Durham were. They
addressed them on the wage question.
Some of the people were for the wage
question, and some for the Charter.
Then there is evidence given by Jamieson, about the granting of licenses to
parties to carry on their work. Stephenson, Fenton and Durham were proved
to be in the room where the licenses were
given. That proves their participation
in those acts. I believe that is, substantially, all the evidence relating to those
persons. Fenton and Durham sat at the
Mosley Arms, Stalybridge, where licenses were granted to the people to carry
on a portion of their works. Aitkin was
one of those who attended at that early
meeting where they spoke of "the dark
nights coming on."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :Your Lordship was asking about Lees:
the witness Maiden speaks to Lees.
The JUDGE: -With regard to Challenger there is evidence that he and Aituin went over to Preston. Samuel Ban-

r~ster, high constable of Preston, says
they attended a meeting in Preston on the
evening of the 12th of August. A resolution was passed that the people of Preston would not go to work till the Charter
became the law of the land. Challenger
said the cotton lords of Preston were
the greatest tyrants in the country,
and Aitkin said, he had suffered
in the cause of the people, and had
already been imprisoned, but would do
anything more he could to assist them.
I don't know, gentlemen, that there is
anything more material. That is the
substance of their evidence.
The evidence against Lees is that of Matthew
Maiden, the constable of Ashton. Lees
was heading up a crowd to Barrow's new
buildings, on the 18th of August, and
desired the bricklayers to desist from
work. There is no doubt that Lees was
taking an active part in a riot on the 18th
of Aug ust.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-Samuel
Turner is another, my Lord, who speaks
to Lees.
The JUDGE :-I can assure you it is
a very difficult matter, by any arrangement, to get regularly through a thing so
complicated as this. I will put a query
under the name of Robert Lees, as there
may be a question whether he is the same
person here spoken of. [Reads Turner's
evidence.] Lees has been guilty of very
criminal acts; but, at the same time, it
is for you to say, whether they are such
acts as can conduct you to the belief that
they were the result of a conspiracy. It
is one thing to be participating in a riot,
and another to be participating in a
combination to cause a riot. I cannot
say whether it may not strike another in
a different light. Circumstances that
strike some as affording very little evidence, strike others as affording very
strong evidence. I now come to John
Lewis, Thomas Storah, Patrick Murphy
Brophy, and William Booth. The
evidence against Lewis is that of Joe
Cooper. [See Read's evidence.] Brophy attended some of the early meetings, but he does not appear to have taken
a very active part in them. He attended
some meetings at Ashton and Stalybridge, but it does not appear that he
used any violent language.
He en-

389
courages teetotalism, and seems rather a
peaceful man. He attended a meetingin
Carpenter's Hall, and, on the morning
of the 11th, was at a meeting in Granbyrow 'fields. He certainly did not take
a very active part in those proceedings.
Thomas Storah attended some of the
early meetings. He is spoken to by the
first witness. He is spoken to by Brierly
as having attended meetings at Ashton
and Stalybridge, where some of the workpeople assembled for the purpose of get.
ting their wages raised. He does not
seem to have taken any very active part
in the movement. • Whether he was engaged in any conspiracy, it is for you to
say. Then, there is Booth and Pilling.
Booth is spoken to by the witnessLittle.
Sir GREGORY LEWIN :-- Little,
Buckley, and Rhodes, my Lord.
The JUDGE :- Little, speaking of
the meeting of the 12th of August, says,
Leach, Booth, and Candelet were there.
Leach made one of his speeches. Booth
spoke next in nearly the same strainO, but then I must tell you what the
same strain is,-Samuel Sidebottom, an
auctioneer at Hyde, proposed that the
people should go to the masters and ask
for the wages of 184 . Booth spoke in
nearly the same strain,but the witness did
not take down his words. A meeting was
held in the Market-place at Hyde on the
15th, Muirhouse was in the chair. Leach
spoke at great length. He began to say
what large expenses the Queen had put
the country to, and a great deal of vulgar
language about her drinking so much
wine. But, gentlemen, I must tell you,
that you must not convict him for merely
using that language, because the more
vulgar and coarse his language is the
less. probability is there-though guilty
of acts of sedition and excitement-the
less probability is there of his being
guilty of anything that would amount to
an arrangement for the purpose of carry-.
ing out those ulterior designs. Buckley
speaks to a meeting on the 17th of August.
Booth was there and advised the meeting
to draw their money out of the clubs and
banks. There was a meeting on the
Haigh on the 13th of August, at which
Booth was.
Crossley, Durham, and
Fenton were there.
Stephenson and
Crossley wanted to give up having any
thing to do with the Charter. Thie people

of Hyde blackguarded them for having
any thing to do with it. Booth is also
spoken of by Thomas Rhodes, who represents him as speaking at one of those
meetings about the expenses of the Royal
household.
This confirms the other
witness. That is the evidence against
Booth. Now, there is one' defendant
It is
whom I accidentally omitted.
that man (Pilling) who gave us that
melancholy tale yesterday. He is represented as speaking very strongly at
the Stockport meeting and at several
other places. The witness Oliver speaks
to him and Challenger. He said they
encouraged the people to remain out
till they obtained a fair day's wages for a
fair day's work, and until the Charter
became the law of the land. Pilling is
also spoken to by Turner. With regard
to Pilling, it seems to me that the general tendency of his addresses, as described
by the witnesses, was very much in conformity with what you heard yesterday
from himself; consisting more in describing the masters as hard-hearted towards
the work-people, and that they should get
more wages, rather than forming part of
any conspiracy. I will make no apology
for omitting to read the evidence respecting him. I think there is iio reason to
go over it again. YOu have now the
case of all. Scholefield's case stands by
itself. Other defendants have attended
those meetings, and taken more or less
an active part in them, Then there are
the defendants who acted as delegates at
Manchester; and then all those defendants whose names are not struck out, and
who appear to have attended those various meetings, and spoke with more or
less violence at them; some being for
political, and some for other objects.
Now, does the evidence as to all, or any
of them, satisfy you that they were parties to some general conspiracy to effect
certain objects P If it does, then by
no means hesitate, or shrink for a moment from declaring all of them guilty.
But if you think it can fairly be explained
in any other way, and that you have no
reason to suppose that the defendants
were parties to any general combination,
then it will be your duty to find them
not guilty. Bearing in mind that, if
you acquit them of conspiracy, you by
no means acquit them of punishment;
cc

390 .o
for by the testimony nere, which is not
Harney, George Julian, Guilty on the 5th
answered, some of the defendants are count?
Hill, William, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
certainly guilty of outrageous and ScanHoyle, John, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
dalous violence. But that is not the
Leach, James, 'Guilty on the 4th count.'
question here now, but whether they are
Lomax, John, ' Not Guilty.'
guilty of the offence of combining to efLeach, John, 'Guilty on the 4th count.'
feet a certain object. If you think they
Lees, Robert, 'Not Guilty.'
are, ::then find them guilty; but if that
Lewis, John,' Not Guilty.'
charge is not, to your mind, made out
M'Douall, Peter Murray, 'Guilty on the 4th
by reasonable proof, then return a verdict
count.'
of not guilty.
M' Cartney, Bernard, Guilty on the 4th count.'
Sir GREGORY LEWIN:-I believe
Massey, John, 'Not Guilty.'
the jury has not the name of ChippenMahon, Thomas, 'Not Guilty.'
dale.
Mooney, James, 'Guilty on the 4th count.'
The JUDGE :-Yes, they have.
Morrison, David, 'Guilty on the 4th count.'
About six o'clock his Lordship finally
Norman, John, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
concluded, when the jury a second
O'Connor, Feargus, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
time. retired.
After an absence from
Otley, Richard,' Guilty on the 5th count.'
court of about half an hour, they reParkes, Samuel, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
turned into court, and returned their
Pilling, Richard, 'Not Guilty.'
verdict.
Ross, David, 'Not Guilty.'
The following is a list of the prisoners,
Railton, Thomas, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
together with the verdict pronounced on
Ramsden, Robert, ' Guilty on the 5th count.'
each :Scholefield, James, 'Not Guilty.'
Aitkin, William, ' Guilty on the 5th count.'
Smith, Thomas Browne, 'Not Guilty.'
Skevington, James, 'Guilty on the 5th count.'
Arthur, James, (alias M'Arthur), ' Guilty on
Stephenson, William, ' Not Guilty.'
the 4th count.'
Storah, Thomas, 'Not Guilty.'
Arran, John, ' Guilty on the 5th count.'
Taylor, Frederick Augustus, 'Guilty on the
Bairstow, Jonathan, 'Guilty on the 4th
4th count.'
count.'
Taylor, James, 'Not Guilty.'
Brooke, Robert, ' Guilty on the 4th count.'
Woolfenden, Albert, 'Not Guilty.'
Beesley, William,' Guilty on the 5th count.'
Woodruffe, William, ' Guilty on the 5th count.'
Brophy, Patrick, ' Not Guilty.'
The following defendants had been
Booth, William, ' Not Guilty.'
previously acquitted by consent :Campbell, John, ' Guilty on the 4th count.'
John Allinson, James Cartledge, George
Cobper, Thomas,' Guilty on the 4th count.'
Johnson, Thomas Pitt, William Scholefield,
Clarke, Joseph, ' Not Guilty.'
John Thornton, and John Wilde.
Chippendale, James, ' Not Guilty.'
The JUDGE presumed the jury meant
Challenger, Alexander or Sandy, 'Guilty on to say that those guilty on the fifth count
the 5th count.'.
would be guilty on the fifth count only,
Candelet, George,' Guilty on the 4th count.'
and that those guilty on the fourth would
Crossley, John, 'Not Guilty.'
be guilty on the fifth also.
Durham, John, ' Guilty on the 4th count.'
The Foreman replied in the affirmative.
Doyle, Christopher, ' Guilty on the 4th count.'
Mr.SERGEANT MURPHY thanked
the jury for the patient attention they had
Fletcher, John, ' Not Guilty.'
paid to the case.
Fraser, Thomas, 'Not Guilty.'
The jury were then discharged, and
Fenton, James, ' Guilty on the 4th count.'
the Court (at seven o'clock) adjourned.
Grasby, James,' Not Guilty.'

END

OF THE TRIAL.

BROTHER CONSPIRATORS FOR SUPPRESSING A REVOLUTION.
TRE present number concludes a verbatim report of the trial of myself and fifty-eight
others, at Lancaster, upon the several charges set forth in the indictment. 1 had
reason to expect that the whole could be brought into four numbers, but my anxiety
that nothing should be concealed upon which the verdict was returned, precluded the
possibility of curtailing the work by a single sentence. As it is my intention to complete the publication as formerly promised, with notes upon the evidence, and a
commentary upon those causes which led to results which might have cost myself
and my friends our lives-and which all but cost us our liberty-I shall abstain from
entering at present upon any view of that subject.
In next week's number (with which will be presented a very splendid likeness of Baron Rolfe; a man whose honour, talent, and impartiality I shall reverence and esteem as long as life remains), I%propose to submit my comments upon the evidence, and also upon the causes which led to the outbreaks.
For the work in question I can only say, that for faithfulness it could not
be surpassed, and, having heard all, I can conscientiously declare, that I did not believe it possible for one man to perform such a task. This transaction, besides, the
mental annoyance to which it has subjected me, has put me to an expence of between
£300 and £500 so that my present prosecutors have rigidly acted upon the
politic advice of their predecessor, Lord Melbourne, who recommended the Staffordshire magistrates, to " ruin the Chartists with expences."
The declaration of many of the judges of the land, and also of Sir W. Follet,
Solicitor-General, has armed me with so strong a case against the real offenders, that
if justice is to be had for those who illegally suffered with me, it shall be had, even
though I should in truth be " ruined with expence." The matter, I am resolved, shall
not rest here. I feel that we have been sorely aggrieved; and, while vengeance is no
part of my character, I will allow no means to remain untried, by which justice may
be had.
The country, notwithstanding the numerous publications and assertions relative to
the late disturbances, is still wholly ignorantof the depth of the conspiracy, the mode by
which it was to be worked, and the results which were anticipated from it. None however, save the willing blind, shall longer remain ignorant. The country narrowly
escaped a bloody civil war, and those who interposed and stopped it narrowly
escaped an ignominious death; however, to the latest hour of my existence, I shall
rejoice at being mixed up, even as a conspirator, in an affair which has compelled
the enemies of Englishmen to bear testimony to their magnanimity and patriotism,
and which furnishes a practical illustration of the regard in which the oppressed,
inthe hour of excitement and destitution, hold the lives and properties of their
oppressors. Yes, my friends, as a conspirator, " guilty of something little short of
high treason," I most devoutly thank my God, that, in your hunger, you stole not;
in your anger, you injured not ; in your wrath, you destroyed not; and in your
vengeance, you KILLED NOT. With such men you will ever find me a willing
conspirator.
Your faithful Servant and Friend,
FEARG US O'CONNOR.

PREFACE
was a general feeling at Lancaster with persons of all classesConspirators, Jurymen, League, and Spectators-that Chartism, after
the trial, was not in the same position as previously; and there cerrainly was much to support such a conclusion. It is worth while to look
tather deeply into the circumstances. We are so apt to be unduly excited and needlessly to despond, that an impartial and candid review of
our position is at all times desirable; the facts of the Lancaster trial
appear to afford a fair opportunity for this purpose. On them we can
stand and pause: the question how far they have influenced Chartism,
and how far Chartism influenced them, demand our deepest thought.
Chartism is now revolutionizing a world; the process has already begun; its leaders, as: they are called, have been, and are, but the willing
servants of a spirit, which commenced with Christianity, and will not
rest satisfied with any consummation save universal brotherhood. From
them we can survey our position-our strength, our weakness; the work
we have already done and what remains for us to do. In the year that
has passed our strength has been measured, our weapons have been
tried; films that obscured our vision have been removed. We see more
clearly what we are and what they are with whom we struggle. These
considerations involve much curious as well as serious matter.
SThe history of the late strike in Staffordshire, Lancashire, &c., will be
entered upon hereafter. The League had determined to create simultaneous and overwhelming destitution-trusting that thereout would arise
a frenzy-that frenzy would lead to violence, intimidation, &c.; and by
all the circumstantial and resulting disorder and hubbub, it was hoped
that the government would be terrified into a partial opening of the
ports, and eventually compelled to a total repeal of the Corn-laws.
This was the plan-shrewd, large, and ingenious-and certainly the
circumstances appeared remarkably favourable for its developement.
The League were the Magistrates: they could let the thing go as
far as they thought fit and stop it when they thought fit: they could so
plant the police, that their own property should be protected while that
of others might be sacrificed as an "example to the government."
As Leaguers, they could congregate together the starving masses whose
.misery themselves had created-cheering them on even into the heart of
Manchester-and then, as magistrates, they could frighten the government
-sending for troops, sitting up all night, ordering the soldiers to march
about, making specials, and so forth. If the fire flagged the soldiers
THERE

D D

392
could go to sleep, and FINNIGAN, and FALVEY, and ACLA , and THOPI
SON, could stir it up agai:; could tell the people they "had been quiet
too long," and offer to " lead them to magazines 6f plunder." If any
dread were manifested of the military and magisterial power, the mob
could be informed that " the magistrates had determined not to be made
the tools of the aristocracy, and had agreed that the military should not
fire upon the people." If, on the contrary, the thing became too hot,
the magistrates could immediately wake from their :slumbers, recollect
" their duty to their country and their Queen;" parade t Le n i ny;
disperse the rioters and take all the credit of "restoring order and tranquillity,"-GADSBY and RAWSON could then take up an address to
Her Most Gracious Majesty and be made into knights, and the Magistrates generally could receive the thanks of both houses of parliament.
And if any thing happened untoward; if it become necessary for somebody to be hanged or transported or prosecuted-there too the League were
safe. Cobden had boasted that they could break the law with impunity,
"for that they were the administrators of the law :" if Leaguers were prosecuted, Leaguers as grand jurymen could ignore the bills, or as special
or petty jurymen acquit their brother agitators. And, if it should so
happen that Chartists should find their way into the dock, then again the
genuine Leaguer, who " looks at the Corn-laws as a religious question,"
would be entranced with holy joy: he would be smitten all over with the
recollection of his "'paramount duty to his beloved sovereign." With
GEORGE WILSON for a juryman, FEARGUS O'CoNNoR's chance of an acquittal would have been remarkably small.
Now we have said that the plan was shrewd and ingenious-and so it
_w as every way it appeared sure of success. If the revolt were attributeto the influence of want-want arising from a permanent decline of
.gmmerce-then the argument for a repeal of the Corn-laws would of
iurse be irresistible. If, on the other hand, the League were charged
with creating the movement, they could point to it as a proof of their
power, at any moment, to throw society into a convulsion, and, by threatening a periodical visitation of this sort, extort their favourite measure
from the fears of the legislature. There was the third probability-it
might be said that the Chartists " did it," and then too the Leaguers
could gratify their magnanimity, and wreak an exemplary vengeance on
their most powerful, consistent, most watchful, .and untiring foe.
And how was it that it all failed ? All was arranged, prophecied, and
provided for; no possible set of circumstances could be better adapted
to the work: and for some time all went as had been foretold-regularly as clock-work. There was no hitch in the machinery; not a movement but what had been predicted; not an hour had been miscalculated.
The" preparing" had begun-the threat to reduce 25 per cent before
Christmas-( WiLcox let it all out in Court-JoNsoN, had he been a

~393
witness, instead of a.defendant, could have told much more). At the
appoln tedetime. BAILEY had told his men" to go and play fora month"then came the, " turn-lt" -at StocEkport; then the march to Manchester;
then thespecials; thcn the miita6ry;-then the sittings up of the magistrates all night ; then more militlary- (then the dinings together onlthe
sly-pokin)thteir thick fists into each others' ribs; and'the silly cackle
and chuclding sneeze-and the loud beer-laugh-of anticipated sucgOf Parsley Peel"). Then more specials;
cessful roguery-the " doing
more-soldiers; a gas-lamp smashed-then a calling the soldiers up
and a quick narch through the streets; more "sitting up," and'thenwhat then.?
Why did iiutil? When. a well contrived and well acted scheme ofvillainy meets with premature exposure, the first feeling ofthe defeated
,.CJonathan" or " Sir Giles" is that of disappointment at some supposed want of foresight: the imputation on their professional skill is felt
as a more galling sore than their loss of plunder-as a disgrace in fact
to their education, parenlage and craft. No charge however of this sort,
c
ca, we feel assured, be mad e against the League: every possible preparation that the irost ingenious ,pickpoket could devise had beenmade
months before; and the people answered to thecry of starvation as readlily and lustily as if they had been mayors aid aldermen.
Why, then, did the plain fail ?-We are aware that certai Tory
members of the League had expressed but a qualified approbation of the
insurrection trick, faring that it might drive Peel from the political
helm: they were afraid, in fact, toehbarasese
men had great personal influence; they were better masters, fairer
alers, ae more liberl wages, and used much les's "soddy," and of
Ift Sppe-ioripprir
oods tantheir
~t qialit, inthirgood than he shopocrat brethren of the
qalty in their
Whig schooll. They did niot exactly refuse'their co-operation, but they
were sullky upon it., Therexwas anotbier party-as much too warm as
their Tory- brethren were too chilly': ill-used gentlemen "who owed
more than they were able to iay,".-(WVe speakgetyfo our mind is
mercifufl)-a " smash " would'enable these worthies to b'e sacificeed in the
general ip'isfortune, in~stead of each going off in his own individual peculiar
smell; and there wei'c others who desired'hiothing so much as a BLAZING
ADVEPLTISETMENT. Of

the liberality of.their own particular insurance office;

their. machinery wa's of the old- vort, and they were desirous of having the
latest improvements at a cheap rate, so that they mnight compete with
their neighbours. All this was lnown, and a sort of jealousy was created:
we do not go into it deeply,.for we have a wholesome horror of the libel
law.-, Still these drawbacks did not amount to muchi; the Tory portion
were,- cajol'ed.. into a sort. of 'negliltive acquiescence-they were to move
neithier way; while, the.others-those, who wish'ed to have all the latest
Tto namore modeilrate expessin fther
impovenens-wrefrig-hte-ned

394

-hopes. The dangers, then, were surmounted, and the League justly considered themselves the stronger-sqfer-fortheir timely discovery.
Why, I hen, did th plin fail ?-Rogues and chess-players commit one
blunlder in common ; their anxiety to fortify their own position prevents
their being sufficiently accurate in calculating the forces which operate
against them. One fact had been overlooked; what was that? Listen
to it, ConDEN; ponder on it, POTTER, think on it, BROOKS-print it on
your calicoes, and stiffen it, you manufacturers of Manchester!
THE PEOPLE ARE ENLIGHTENED!
(Tyranny trembles at the awful
truth!) They saw through the trick in far less time than it takes to tell
the roguery: the thing had been exposed over and over again; not a
writer or speaker on the Chartist side but had simplified the fraud
beyond the possibility of doubt or misconception. They suffered the
League to lead them just sofair as it suited them to follow; they used
the men of calico as an article of convenience; and then, when the
proper hour had come-when, as the Attorney-General said at Lancaster,
"all seemed ripe;" when " tens of thousands had flung down their
instrumnents of labor, and their taskmasters trembled at their energy;"
-when, "within fifty iniles of Manchester every engine was at rest;" then
it was that, in the stern quietude of a voluntary pause-a pause, possibly,
(for we live in strange times), that may occur again-and again-and

again-the

great truth' was proclaimed, that

UNINETII:SAL POLITICAL POWER would
COMBINE in aly REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT.

EQUAL

OTHING SHORT OF
FOR
the working classes ever

And this truth-The People are enlightened-the knowledge of itthe proof it-its bold and public exhibition amid circumstances and
influences which, in a less enlightened hour, would have seduced the
creators of all Wealth from their allegiance to the sovereignty of their
own order--is the great and grand fact of the year 1842; and worth,
even if it stood alone-aye, mrnore than worth-all the torture and toil and
expence that has since resulted. Previously there might have been
doubts as to the faith of the working classes to their CHARTER-the
principle of univei'sal brotherhood. True, they had confuted the League
lecturers; had laughed to scorn and derision the " large loaf and little
10af" humrbug; had refused to be excited by the "Dead Cow" and
" Murder" Placards. But still there was doubt: they had never yet
been tried with a regular, real insurrection, where they were to have all
their own way-with real soldiers, who were not to fire, spectators of the
drama which they were by no means to interrupt-with real magistrates,
full-grown Sir Thomases, walking through the streets, stealthily encouraging, and "making believe" not to see. Such a game had never yet
been tried; and it seemed to bear strong probabilities of success. Well,
it has been tried, and that, too, under circumstances when even those
who confided most strongly in the People might have trembled for their

395

stability. It has been tried andfailed! 0, what a world of trouble that
failure hath saved -us, No more ravings from MASSIES, and TAUNTONS,
and THOMPSONS ; no more horrible and pathetic prophecies about the
"coming winter;" no more "Dead Cow" Placards; no more blasphemous appeals to the Deity about "curses," and "damnable," and
" thunders from the altar," and "live coals." Did the trash-mongers
really believe that the working men of England would ever )e cajoledbamboozled-by their hollow cant and hypocrisy? Out upon the twaddlers !-their " dust" has blinded them
It is not, however, for the purpose of an idle sarcasm or triumph over
the League that we have thus gone rapidly over the ground: the League
might live and rant through its hour and die, as die it will without
exciting a remark from us: their splutter is not unamusing, nor is it
altogether useless as a provocative of thought. But we have given this
hurried hurl at their misdeeds, because, with their results, they form,
in our opinion, one of the grandest and most startling facts in modern
history. The scenes in the days of Priestly and Lord George Gordon
with the drunken horrors in our own time at the Bristol Reform riots, had
generated a conviction approaching to, certainty, that the people were
unable to resist the frenzy of an insurrectionary movement-that the
maddening influences of penury and starvation would scatter to the
winds their wisest resolves. Alas ! too true were the premises: it is
ours to showo that they are neither necessary nor eternal. We poiht to
the fact with pride-defying all history to produce its parallel-ofa people
like ours-so goaded-so trampled upon--with so many wrongs to
redress-so many incentives to successful violence-exercising so large
an amount of self controul, and restraining their wildest aspirations to
the one never-dying, all-absorbing determination to struggle for nothing,
to war for nothing, to wish for nothing, to "strike" for nothing, but
EQUAL,

UNIVERSAL, POLITICAL POWER!

Further on will be found an affidavit of Mr. FEARGus O'CONNOR, giv-

ing some few extracts from the speeches with which it was sought to
irritate the people to the required degree of madness. By observing the
dates, it will be seen that the doses in the first instance were comparatively mild-what are calledfeelers. As the plot thickened, the physic
became stronger and more gingery: till as the tia:r e for action drew nigh
-in August last, and the weeks immediately preceding that month-the
recommendation to violence, intimidation, theft and assassination became
clear, decided, and unmistakable.- We ask our readers to peruse this affidavit attentively, and more than once. It teaches more lessons than
one. The mass of League sedition will be brought forward in mitigation
of punishment when the conspirators are brought up to receive sentence;
and it is certainly a most terrific proof of the tremendous amount of guilt
that may be committed with impunity by persons in high places.

How-

ver,.there:1isno, reason to fea that the incendiary doses iillbe repeated.
The 7'League have received a lesson that iill long be recollected. Evenif
they should determine, what really seemns impossible, on getting up.another insurrection, there is- groun for belief that the government, now in
ad
the secret, would refuse to send the red coats necessary to keep up the
show: and, without military, an insurrection-would seem too farcical.
Altogether then we may mae up our inds that the."rising and rioting
all over the. country" plan will not be repeiated for some-time
But there are other features besides the proofof the, people's fiithto
their principls, and their determination not to rest satisfied with any
measure short of them, which are worth a cursory observation. or two
There are signs abroad-evry hour they become less vague-and shadowy
& of a imore generous,. spirit than formerly, being extended to the bold
speculations of enquiry,. anTd.- inidependenice and freedom in opinion. The
principles of Chartisimn_ how,,wonderfi the hange which a few years
have produced-may nowbe professed without excitingeither horrloror
dismay. For this.improvem enl t we: are of courseidebted somewhat to
that expansive extension of truth,which is the-ieeesary co-incident of civilization; bt mainly- it may he attributed to the iproved conduct of
the Chartists themnselves.
Wke can-afford to admit that therogh-bearing
of some of the most,-h onest advocates, of TNIVERSAL LIBERY,,together
with an occasional, indulgence in language moreexciting than discreet,
may with
pesos have operated against the-fair and impartial con(ny
sideration of our principles. 1T11jis is probable-there are. men whowl
not.listen. to a speaker unless he smells'of lavender ;who,,professing-a
great veneration for theBible, wold not open it uless it were- bound in
Riussia or M'orocco; and, however contemptiblesuch creatures may be, yet,
as they form a large portion of the aristocracy,and thus, both directly and
indirectly, influence the legislature, it is of coursecdesirabl)1e tha,(t thiey should be
heeore
conaverted--soften ed -and' muddled-from error.to. trui.Itws
as well as for the.m'ore, ob-vious general considerations,' tbat the friends of
Chartism rejoiced. at the standing-the beaxnug--assum ed by the conspi..
rators during the- whole c.trial.- It may appjear trivial to notice the details.
of such a miatter, but- they operated iost -powerflly in extortinga
m
amount -- respect, and attention which in itsturn -supported the cause, of'
of
whose hum anizing, operation it was its&blf the. result.. Having regard to
what the Chartists have been described to' be,.we ][might naturally hiave
-expected that, during day; and night of ,the trial, Lancaster would
have, been patrolled ith troops of the same. imilitar~y that enflive-netd "Man!-chester in August; that judg-e, jury, *and lawyers would have been
guiarded by" specials" against the attacks of the "I infulrifated mob"
that the 'Court would have rang at initervals with the shouits. and' groans

397

pected and prophecied. And how stood the fact? Not a single watchman or policeman provoked a disturbance; though the excitement was
intense there was no appearance -of disorder no:
mark of disapprobation or the reverse: quietly and orderly and respectfully, jurymen, barristers, judge and conspirators moved amongst each other-no shoutingno drunkenness-all was conducted with as much decorum and solemnity as the christening of the Princess Royal.
Pooras the men were, all were well clad; they had clubbed their poverty
together; they were there to fall for -liberty-and the pride of Rome's
proud Consul was theirs " to fall with decency." Their respectable appearance, forbearing spirit, and calm and patient demeanour, were a constAnt topic of admiring observation. But we mention not these things
as peculiar to Lancaster-as such indeed they would be entitled to a
passing remark-but we give them here as a sample of the change that has
grown throughout the Chartist ranks.. Much indeed, of what was called
enthusiasm has apparently subsided-the glare of the torch has gone out.
Processions and demonstrations, instead of being considered necessary " to
keep up the steam," are abandoned with the feeling that they are but little worth-and flags and banners perhaps may yield to what seems to be
a general necessity. Be it so-they have done their work-and well!
We may not conclude this panoramic view without a remark or two
on the Bar. The progression with barristers in their treatment of opinion,
and its high responsibilities and privileges, has indeed been great.
There are amongst us some who can recollect the trials of 1839-40the cold sneer of denial of " any sympathy with Chartist opinions" with
which all the speeches were then disgraced, followed by a course of
argument which first let down the Political Martyr to the moral rank of
a poacher or a sheepstealer, and then exhausted its emasculated squeak
on'some technical deficiency in evidence or pleading. How changed the
tone! Who that listened to the bold eloquence of Dundas and Baines,
Murphy, Atherton, and M'Oubrey, did not feel that the period was
coming when, as of old time, the bar might owe its dearest laurels
to its undaunted advocacy of liberty. But again we are reminded that
our space is nigh exhausted; it 'would take, indeed, a long page to comment on this one of the most significant signs of the times,-a sign, too,
that every hour is increasing in vigor.
The speeches of the Conspirators were a feature in thestrial that will
not soon be forgotten. Carefully avoiding all tone or attitude of declamation or defiance-appealing entirely to reason alone-they one and all
avowed, that firm faith in their principles, which.at once and for ever
destroyed the supposition that treachery or tyranny could either cajole or
daunt them: to the dungeon they might go-they talked not of dying
there; (there was no twaddle of "laying their heads on the block," or
of "the purple stream of life forgetting to flow,"-all that went out with

398

the "torch-light meetings;") bt t quietly and calmly they avowed their
intention patiently to abide their doom-that the hour of their release should
.ritness a renewal of their abiding in the cause they were martyrs to.
For its simple fervid eloquence the scene was affecting and impressive
beyond all power of description.
And the Judge-but we speak not of him. HE is HISTORY. He
stands alone !-the only Judge that ever earned the confidence of the
working classes. He stands out from his fellows-clear, clean, and distinct. His summing up to the jury, and his whole demeanour through
the trial, was a perfect model of patience, labour, and impartiality. And
yet it was not for any one of these, nor for all combined, that he is principally to be regarded: his chief claim to our homage is the manner in
which he brought truth-real,not legal, truth-to bear upon the evidence.
All the ancient rigmarole of three and four years ago was shattered in an
instant: the conspiracy charge was utterly blown away: there was no
reading long extracts from old books about the sinfulness and wickedness, disloyalty and indecency, of saying anything calculated to excite a
tendency to something that might provoke, a discussion which might
lead to remarks calculated to induce a belief that expressions would be
used which, in the opinion of loyal persons, would result in something
which was intended to bring the' Queen, and Sir James Graham, the
Royal Babes, and all the Constituted Authorities, into contempt! All this
was declared to be moonshine; the jury were told to look at the whole
charge and judge of it by the principles of common sense and common
honesty. The feeling was-" Who ever heard a judge talk in that strain
before ?" It was so plain and intelligible-no mystification-no " paltering in a double sense." As somebody sitting behind us observed, "He
is not like a judge;" nor is he-such judges as are usually sent to try
Chartists. However, "one swallow does not make a summer;" and
we must not suppose that the usual characteristics of prosecutions for
opinion are all at once to vanish; there are, unfortunately, facts enough
the other way to prevent our adopting such an error.
And here the Printer has warned us we must conclude. The subject
is of a nature which leads us fron_ one consideration to another till we
know not where to stop. Sufficient, however, has been said, to excite
attention to some of the more prominent features of this, the most extraordinary trial oft modern times. The affidavit which follows will explain
much, and with the "Analysis of the Evidence" and the " Causes of the
Outbreak" will give that general view of the whole affair which is
mecessary to a right understanding of the evidence.
It is a fair subject for congratulation, that such a record of our progress is in existence. It would be well for Chartism if every trial were
fought-fought out-step by step-from beginning to end-as this has
b-een. But we shall learn wisdom by experience !

AFFIDAVIT OF FEARGUS O'CONNOR, ESQ.

THE

QUEEN
AGAINST

FEARGUS O'CONNOR AND OTHERS.
FEARGUS O'CONNOR, of Hammersmith,in the county of Middlesex,Esq.
maketh oath and saith, that he is one of
the defendants in the above indictment,
and that, on the 9th day of March last,
at Lancaster, in the county of Lancaster,
he was, with several others of the defendants, found guilty on the fifth count of
the said indictment. And this deponent

wages and political freedom. And this
deponent further saith, that, at and
about the period to which the said evidence as aforesaid relates, a very large
latitude of expression with regard to subjects of political discussion was allowed
by the Queen's government, and, in particular, that persons high in authority,'

speeches, and hand-bills, alleged tq have
been done, spoken and published between
the 1st day ofAugust and the 1st day of
October last, and that such evidence related principally to a general stoppage of
work, which occurred in Manchester, in
the county of Lancaster aforesaid, and
the neighbourhood thereof, in the month
of August last, in consequence of a reduction having been commenced and
threatened by the several manufacturers
carrying on trade in Manchester and its
neighbourhood aforesaid, and in consequence, as stated in the said evidence, of
a general desire among the working classes that the document called the People's
Charter should be passed into a law; and
that the said acts, speeches, and handbills were in furtherance of, and in connection with, the said desire for better /

with the administration of the laws, were
permitted, without prosecution, interruption, remonstrance, check or observation,
to make use of language much more inflainmmatory, seditious and exciting than
any that by the present indictment, and
the evidence given at the said trial thereof,
was charged against this deponent and the
other defendants, or any of them, or than
has on any other occasion been charged
against this deponent. And this deponent further saith, that there has been for
the last two years published at Manchester aforesaid, a weekly newspaper or journal, called the Anti-bread Tax Circular,
at the expence and with the authority and.
support ofanassociationcalling themselves
the Anti-corn-law League, and that, of the
said association, the following, amongst
others, justices of the peace for the BR-..

that is to say MAGISTRATES, BOROUGHsaith, that the evidence against him, and REEVES, MAYORS, ALDERMEN, MEMBERS
all the other defendants, consisted of acts, OF PARLIAMENT, and others entrusted

400

r*ough1 of Mancchester, are active members an ADDlESorleading article, from which
anlid, as this deponent.has heard and be- the following is an extract, thatis to sa:Si eves, menal9,s ofh ex~a s0 lk (T.eofsd
A
We ask our rcoutitry w w t -isoe n
directinr and superintending its manage- now ? We call on the tramipled'children of toil
moncnt, that is to say, 8iu THOMAS for a sign; we speak to the millions of undaunted
T.
~n
W- donem
POTTE,
ELKANAiAmITAGE, JOHN J~. dauntless.hearts which, withinbe these
and
BRtook
s,
IPOBrET IYDE, A. WATKINS
slands, yet beat, responsive to the cry for
J. 13. SMIITH, AND C. J. T. NALKER, frIeedom and for justice ; are we still to cry for
Esqs., all of them persons ofgreat freedom and for justice-are we still to bow
vealth, and whose acts, speeches, pub- the neck to the hoof of the
destroyer of our
licalions and example, from their douhie country's
peace-to the desolation ~of homes
the
position and influence as members of the
of millions of-our suffering countrmenWe
council of the said Anti-corn-law League
and as magistrates as a foresaid, adminis- have vanquished many a foe-we have scaled
terIrng the law and acting in the name of the rugged heights where fame and glory sit
the governm ent, have very great power enthroned-we have made it an inheritance not
and authority over the poorer-classes wort sto be born in Britain, and
in -,Manchester aforesaid, and more es- " Shall we who struck the lion down, shall we
,Pty the wolf homage, profering lowly gaze
pecially as an example and definition
And servile knees"
of the hounds andIextent to which
pulitical discussiou s may legally be carried. to men, mortal as ourselves, aisd whose only
And "this deponent further saith, that'in claim to eminenee and pbwer is in the accident
the sixty-second number of thesaid.4nti- that they were born in the possession of acres
bread Tax Circular,_ published onthe and a title? The engine of extortion is now
26th day of May, 1841, there is a lead- creaking heavily; the miserable delusion is
ing article in which the following lan- nearly at..an end. The uped victims of the
guage is used"veiled'prophet"-have beheld, in part, the
"FlEs cft compassed, the death of fifteenper- grim and ghastly lineaments of a fiend, which
sons only, while the sliing inventon of which avarice hasso'long proclaimed a.God; and no
Sir ',ROBERT PEEL iS the patron, has sujected change-of name, no.assum ptionof another title,
hundreds of thousands to the lingering torments of can save the relentless, hot now. expiring, foe -of
starvation. The slidigg scale is a perfect scheme man., The
.Corn-law isnowto'he repealed, not
of legalized murder,and .robbery."
because the gang of spoilers have repented, and
And ..
that, in the said number of the resolved,,no longer :to Spbil, hut because the
aw.41 ower: o the inih-d :
bf
said dn-ti-breadTax ircula,, there is, mora owerofthemindofour. countryhas
another leading article, cmmencing wt
sheen-up toq coudem1n it, and for fear
the follo wing languagre, that,-is to say
"hat, men -should break,. in their SUBaLIME&
MURDER.-" 11They that 'be- slain -with the
DYESPAILR.
sword are better than, they that be slain wiuth
The hbovds which nature, can no longer hear V"
huge;for these' pine VNwt tricken't hrou gh1 The Corn-law -is, now tohbe, repealed; and it
y
for want 'of the fruits -of the field-La. rests 1-with the people 'of -Britain to say,
pininations, i'v. 9. The Corni Law is the . hole. whether the fetter shall be -again rivetted upon
sale cause .of the starvation -and- disease ,which them, or broken ,asunderr
ever,-xshwbether
are ravagingr the humble dwellings 'of our poorer the industry ofou country'shaill be free, or the
brethren. They, who uphold'that law are vir- reign of injustice -shall be ytt further. protually the mmrderersof their fellow creatures:
longed? We 'feel thatwehv a mission
the riches of those who, profit. by it are. stained to. give the -,answer to- this question ; and we
with the, blood of, human victims, and they who reply,,in. the name of ,our country, in the ,name
htok .Coldly on,- and neglect the. means in. their of mercy,.in the-%41me of justice, the inhuman
power to abolish the law, are equally the accom- monopoly of the,. food of ._twenty_-seven. millions
plices in the guilt of imurder."
of humoan beings. ahalV be now s-snakied ntterly
warnn voice to
_And. this deponent further saith, that and ior ever? We raise-our .in the, eighty..Osecond number. of. the said the rulers, of, Britin-we would speak -in: tones
Anti-bread Tax Circular, published on which ,shall -penetrate the .palace -of -our Sovethe 10I day -of F14ebruary, 1842, there is reign, -allguiltless as: she is-of, the woes, she may
th

401
not heal-we would point the cold, valculating
eye. 6f aristocracy, to the darknes;ofth
ture,which is faintly risingto the view, and
we would tell them that, in: their mad attempt
to forge afresh the chain which has so.long
galled and fretted, a too long enduring people,
they dare a danger which they may not fully
know,but from which, assuredly,if they persist,
there is noescape."
And-d-that, in the same number of the

said. Anti-corn-law. Circular, thereare
also the following expressions, portionof
anothrpleading article, that.is
"We proclaim to the landawners, to the aris.
tocracy,itbat, they:-are the cause and the.instrument whereby lamentation reigns in our streets,
and-clouds, which no mortal eye can penetrate,
hang over and around our ntio4al path. We
denounce them as the men,I'Who, sowing curses,
ask why curses grow 1'and, whilst we denounce,
WE. RAY that their hearts may be softened, their
understandings. enligtened,.and, their.conseil
ences awakened to a sense of Justice due to the
sUffering millions,-who regard them as the anthprs of their woes, lest, having' Sownthe
wnin, they may have to reap Ike whirlwind."'
.And this depoent further saith, that the
said inti-bread Tax Circular.frequently
at- the period immediaey preceding the
late stoppage of work inManchester foresaid, contained songs and versescallingfor
the abhorrence and curses of the people on
the authors and encouragers of the Cornlaw, and exciting -the masse of the people tohatred of the government, and that
thle folio i ng lines,, amongst others, are
in the"79th number of the said Circular,
published on the 30th day of Decembqr,
1841, that is to say:
"DIED OF STARVATION."
CORONER'S INQUEST.

I

met'FAMINE, on

my way,

Prowling for her human~ prey,
Clogg,'d with filth, and clad in rags,
Ugliest of all ugly hags.
Lu! a sceptre wreath'd 'ofsnakes,
In her withered hand she shakes;
And I heard the hag proclaim,
13
read-tax is my sceptre's name!
On remorseless mission bent,
Maiming, murd'ring as she went,
Spreaditg death from 'street to street,
16! I heard the hag repeat,

(Shudd'ring while I heard and saw,)
"Mine i's'RIGHT, and'MiGHT, and.LAW

!"

Then to solitude I fiew...Gracious hea!...cantis be true?
,,On -my trembling knees I fell,
God! thou God of mercy!- tell',
Can the very fiends of hell,
In thy name, their pandects draw,
And declare the licence--law?
Dare they in, thy holy 4ig1t,
To proclaim their robbery RIGHT?
Rouse thee! raise thine awful rod!
Lord, how long?.fHow long? 0! God?"
And that the said verses purport to be
written by John Bowring, a doctor and
a member.f parliament; and that, in
another number of the said Circular, pub lished on the 5th day of May, I142, only
three
onths before the said strike for
wages 'and the Charter in Mlanchester
aforesaid, and when the people, for want
of employment, were in deep distress,

are the folfowing verses, that ig to say
There is a cry throughout the land,
A fearful cry and full of dread
Woe to oppression's heartless band!
A starving people cry for 'bread!
That cry was heard when guilty France,
On the dread brink of ruin stood:
Yet 'sound the viol, speed the dante
'Tis but the hungry cry for food''
I charge ye,England's rulers, grant
The justice that her sons demand
Or roused, the demon powver of want,
Shall snatchthepike and wield the BRAND."
And this deponent further saithr,* that in
the last .mentioned number of Ihbe s.ei.d
circular14 there is' a leading, article, enititled,"The condition of England' Quesln
m
tion," contrasting, in very xit
t
c
guage, the 'diffierent condiin
and, poor, and that the following is3 "al
extract from such leading ~article,- tha-t is
to say
" The dominant party do not inquire what
is, the cause of this wide-wastin g disease; but,
knowing thae existence of it, and fearing that unpleasant results may come out of it, they ask,
' How much, will keep: them quiet ?' It is
within our own kn0*wledge that this, :or a similar
question, has boen often put by these whose
names are near the highkest in -theToll of Britain's

402
bread-taxing nobility. When the fearful distresses of the people were detailed to them, they
turned alike from a consideration of the cause
and of the remedy, and inquired, ' Are they
quiet ?' And it would appear, that, so long as
men will be pilundered without resistance-so
long as men will starve in their cheerless homes,
whose every comfort the inhuman bread-tax had
destroyed-so long as men, and women, and
helpless children .ill pine away, and their wail
of despair is not heard in the halls of the great
and the noble, so long do the grasping monopolists flatter themselves that they may safely
deny to the millions the bread that they toil for.
And it is not amongst the aristocracy only that
the enquiry is, 'Are they quiet?3" The- almost
universal feeling is, that it is marvellous that the

its neighbourhood aforesaid, at the expense, and by and with the concurrence,
of the said Anti-corn-law League. And
this deponent further saith, that other
newspapers, at and about the same period, made use of similar inflammatory
and seditious language, and, in partieular, that the Stockport Chronicle, on the
18th day of March, 1842, had a leading article in the words following, that i
to say
"We have thought and reflected, seriously,
upon the various plans which have been propounded for the purpose of breaking up the
scoundrel combination of the food-producers;
but we cannot think that any plan which we
have yet heard of, at all approaches, in point

patience of the s;.fferers is NOT LONG SINCE of effect and practicability, the one which,
EXHAUSTED/
about two months ago, we recommended to the

consideration of the great employers of manufacturing labour; our proposal was, that all
able-bodied pauperism should be thrown upon
the land. Let no squeamish individuals shrink
from the course pointed out, from any false
beginning of the end is upon us. The patience from the courspointedoutfromanyfalse
millions appears to be well nigh notions of its apparent harshness. The people
of famishing
exhausted; desperation is driving the hopeless sent to their settlements must not go crawlmasses to lawless deeds ; the bayonet is called ing like ordinary paupers. They must go as if
into requisition against the breadless, and an they were marching to BATTLE with their
income-tax is proposed in relief of our impo- oppressors, to take possession of magazines of
PLUNDER, to storm the fortresses of oppresverished trades and unemployed operatives,"
And that, in another leading: article, in
the same number of the said circular,
there are the following expressions:"There are even now evident signs that the

And that in the same number of the said
circular are the following sentences.-to
' The cry of 'give us bread' is changing to
The
of give us bread is changing
' let us take it; ' and all the reply which our
legislators can afford, is a new infernal Inachine,
-an income blister tax and a delusive tariff,
with, perchance, where the symptoms are violent and pressing, the addition of a troop of

sion-and to quarter on a DEADLY ENEMY !

nd this depoent further saith, that in
cAnd this deponent further saith, that in
the Su
Sun London newspaper, of the 12th
0
a of February, 1842, there is a leading
article from which the words folloing,
or to that effect, are extracted, that is to
say :
" To prepare our readers for the great crisis
which is evidently approaching, when reason shall

horse, a few files of infantry, or a leash of Buck- be brought into violent conflict with the blind
ingham blood-hounds, to keep down the rising obedience which has hitherto been preached as

a duty, we have occasionally adverted to the ab.
stomachs of the famishing people."
And this deponent further saith, that tie surd assertion of the Tories, that unless everysaid Anti-bread Taa

Circular is verything called a law be obeyed, whatever crimes it

extensively circulated amongst all classes maciety not held together
is
fall to pieces.
of socity, andparticularl

by

the

So-getting,

illdemoralizing, murderous laws, such as it has

owners amongst their workmen: and that,
in the said month of Augusst
last, and at
and about the period of the said stoppage
of work at Manchester and its neighbourhood aforesaid, a very large number of
copies of the said Anti-bread Tax Circular were, as this deponent has heard and

pleased our selfish landlords to make for the purpose of enriching themselves. Nor have such
barbarous enactments, rightly understood (though
the ceremonies have been gone through of crying
out "the ayes," or "the contents have it," and
of reading alittle Norman French, by which the
ministers for the time being give the nominal
believes, distributed gratuitously amongst sanction of the SOVEREIGN to the bill to which
the labouring classes in Manchester and they have obtained the assent of the two houses)

403
the proper and just authority of law. Mr. Jus- to pay taxes, will be presented at one and the
tice BLACKS!rONE says:-' This law of nature same time to many thousand persons.
The
being coeval with mankind, and dictated by GoD sanctity once belonging to the law, which prehimself,-is of course superior in obligation to vented such conceptions, is at an end; the minds
any other. It is binding over all the globe, in of the people are becoming familiarised with the
all countries, and at all times; no human laws idea of resistance; and, if their misery be not
are of any validity if contrary to this : and such relieved, it will not be long before corresponding
of them as are valid derive all their force and deeds will spring from the idea." ,
authority, mediately or immediately, from this And this deponent further saith, that in
original.' Founding on this high legalauthority, the said Sun newspaper of the 5th day
we have no hesitation in affirming that the Corn- of July last, there is the following lanlaw, which cuts off the commerce between na- guage or to that effect, that is to say
tions, which plunders one class of the community
" Under these painful and trying circumstanto enrich another, and which starves a great multitude of human beings, violating the two express ces the Anti-corn-law League again assembles in
commands, 'Thou shalt not steal,' and 'Thou conference., We look on the proceedings as of
shalt not murder,' founding on the acknowledged serious and solemni import. We earnestly pray
high authority of Mr. Justice BLACKSTONE, We that they may be equal to the crisiswhich brings
unhesitatingly assert, that the Corn-law, which them together. Half measurcs will no longer do.
violates both the revealed law of GoD and the Flattery and fidse language can deceive none but
law of nature, is of no force or validity what- themselves. If whilst they denounce the Cornever. Itfollows, as a necessary consequence, law as unrighteous and iniquitous, they preach
that it is wrong in the people to obey such a scan- obidience to such a law, they will need no enemy
dalous embodyment of immoral selfishness of to overcome them.
If, while they meet in an
the landowners. They have by their obstinate
extraordinary convention, to set aside as they
adherence to an unjust law, brought man's moral
duties, and their enactment into conflict. The hope, the DELIBERATE DECISION OF THE PARenergetic proceedings of the Conference yesterday, (meaning the proceedings of the said AntiCorn-law Conference on the 11th day of February, 1842,) have made this important truth
apparent, And will imaki it necessary for the
community to choose: between obedience to the
moral law or obedience to the aristocracy. We
rejoice to believe that the bulk of the people are
ashamed of their long submission, and they will
OVER-RULE any decision of Parliament which
goes to perpetuate the Corn-laws."
And this deponent further saith, that in
the said Sun ncwspaper of the 7th day

of July last, being but one month before
the said stoppage of work at Manchester
and its neighbourhood as aforesaid, there
is the following language:-" The proceedingsyvesterday at the Anti-cornlaw Conference speak for themselves. Gentlemen who declared they will pay no taxes till the
Corn-law be repealed, were vociferously cheered.
The recital ' that workmen have said it was not
words would move Parliament, but force, and
they would have it if they did not change
their system ;" was heard with no disapprobation. In the manufacturing districts men declared that 'no good can be done until they
riot;' and in the metropolis the information is
received with approbation. To-day and to-morrow it will be spread through the whole empire,
and the ideas of rising, of rioting, and of refusing

LIAMFIT,

they shall profess a love and reverence

fthe body whose decrees they deride and properly wish to upset, they will betray themselves.
They came to London to impugn the wisdom of
parliament; they meet to show that it has done,
and is doing, a grievous wrong to the people, and
unless they express that fearlessly, and honestly,
they will do nothing. What resolutions they
may adopt is not for us to suggest ; but if they
are not now prepared to set the unrighteous
bread-taxers at defiance, to stand firmly and exclusively upon the justice of their cause, they
will not be equal to the occasion."

And this depopent further saith that the
project of stopping the mills and turning
out the hands, for the purpose of driving
the labouring classes to frenzy and rebellion, and thereby over-awing the Queen'
government, was adopted by the manufacturers and capitalists in Manchester
and its neighbourhood aforesaid, so early
as the year 1841, and continued as heretofore and hereinafter stated, to the commencement and after the commencement
of the said stoppage of work in Manchester and its neighbourhood aforesaid, and
that in the .Alorning Chronicle news.
paper of the 20th day of October, 1841
is the following language or to that effect,
that is to say:-

Firomnlage mnufacturers and capitalist
idtherI places, statements have aso-been received
to the effet that they-have the power at once, if
they had the will to use the means, of putting an
end to the -Corn-laws, and that they entertain
serious* the intention of adopting them. These
are TO C1LO8M
ALL THII MILLS, to send the
mass of the rural population; to whom they now
afford ernploymient) hometo theirparishesto be
supported out of landlord-pai'dpoor rates, and to
force- the aristocracy- to maitain the surplus
ag(ricultoural popuilation themselves, sice;they
insist on depriving the commercial-community of
.
the,, only means by which they can do it."
And this deponent further saithtt
the said Anti-bread-tax Circular of the
4th -day of November,1841, are tie Iollowing wIvords, tthat is to say
There is an increasing distrust spreadingas
to the possibility of al~oishing thecorn monopoly by peaceful means."
And that in the saimenumber of the said
Ati-bread-tax Circular, the following
words are said to have been soken at a
large publ metiro atNottinohamnI
b
the county of:Nottingrhamhthats to
e feared the coming of the timwhen six
i
millions of people would arise determined-to he
free w;ith all the world."
And this eponent further saith, that in
the month of June Last.,he had a public
discussion with James Aciandone Of the
hi-redlecturers of the said Ai-corn-la
League at 1-lalifax ina the.countyof York,
w,1,h the said James Acland informred
this deponent that the pleople6 would.eitherl
have' the Char ter or a repeal of the Corn-

laws within three weeks, as the millowners had come to the determination of
closing, nil their mills, and turning all
their hands out.
And this depanent further saith,'that,
(lur
Iing temonths immediately preceding the'said late stoppage of work in Manchiester. aforesaid and its neighbourhood.,
svrlpersons called Anti-corn-law
Lectuirers., went about through. the country endeavouring to excite the-massesw to
violence, and, in particular, that a person
nsamed- FINN-I GAN,, a lecturer employed
by the said Anti-corn-law League was very
active, and violent,. and that, in, one -of his.
speeches at Manchester aforesaid., on the
27th of July last, being but nine days be-

fore the said stoppage of Iwork at Manchester and neighbourhood aforesaid, the
s aid INNIGANmade use of the, following
language, or to that effect, as.this deponent has heardand believes, that is to
say
th gqvernment imagine that, because
Pe

the, peace of Manchesterhas not been disturbed
htherto,it. is anidieaiOf the people's
intentin to:remain quiet, they areI indee.

mistaken, as, like the volcano5 they will, if
not. done to them, _bUrst fort/s at a
time when least expected, and ;on the goernment wil, be the responsibility of whatmay
J UvS ICE.,is

follow."
And that, in the midst of other inflam-

mhatof'lanauagethe Said FINNIGAN at
the n eetino'g'aforesaid, told the people
that brute irce (meanin, 'as- this deponent believes, the governinent and constitutionof thecountry) must be opposed by ibrute force., 'and'
F INIGANaldsosaid,

that the -said.

at the time and place

aforesaidthat Mr. HOLLND_1-

)OLEwho

was a m,.agis tratte, had- stated., that, in
case: Of an;outbreak hle !would nottcall on
the m
nilitary.Anddepon'entIsaith at,
at a meeting also heldi in Manchester
aforesaid, on the 29th day of July last,
being but seven, days before the consnccement of the said stoppage of work
at Manchester and its neighbouhood aforesaid another lecturer,, nared FALVEY,
also employed by the said Anti-corn-aw
Leagn e, used,' as this deponenthas. heard
andI believes, words to the following effect,
that is'to "say
"That'the"repeal of the Corn-laws rested
with the people, and that, if they' were only
firmi and determined,nothin& cou1ld resist them:
that death was preferable "to starvation, a nd
that Manchester had, been quYiet too lond, and
th at he feared, so long' as it remained quiet,

nothing could he done."
And depo nent. saith, that the said
Fi-NNIGAN jctnd' FALVFy ate, as he has
heard and, believe-s, emiplbved and paid
by the Anti-corn-law League, and that
ie said two, last meetings were heldins
the, m ost turbulent parts of Manchester
afioresaid, less then ten days as 4foresaid,
before the said stop page bf work at Manchester aforesaid and its neighbourhood,
for~whfich this. deponent was tried, as aforestaid, at Lancaster aforesaid; that they were

406

called by placards printed by one-GADSBY, MASSIE, an active member of the said
the. authorized printer of the. said Adi' League, made, as, this deponeath
bread Tax Circular,and employed bythe heard arid believes, aspech of'whi I
sauid nti-Corn-law League; and that the the following is a p-ortion, tt
people, to whom the said speeches, were
addressed, were in a state of very great
poverty and distress ; that the said tw
speeches were printed and extensiv]y
circulated amongst the poorer classesin
__anhester' af'oresaid, and that
said
speches were never denied nor Iqualified,
either by the speakers or by the said magisfrates of -Manchester, members of the
ounci1 of the Anti-Corn-law League so
emplying them as aforesaid. And this
ponent further saith, that he has heard,
and believes, that neither the said FINNIGAN

nor the said

FALVEY

say

11
Theyweeatnseatteptec
Ilte had read th

people-so was he
h(stor, ada

ttl
'

of

that hadoccurred at the close of thielast
upon the soil of France. le saw that, it the
time, the first cry of the people was,
iV U
bread aid none of your gabble.' They wre led
by forms iti women's guise bat of is cUlM
energy, and called out in the Court of the lull-leries for immediate food; for that they ee
dytgu, dying, would aot endure it."
and,

have been prose- And that the said speech was reported in

cuted for the said speeches, nor received the Morning Chronicle newspaper Of the
any warning or caution from the-magisrates 12th day of the said month of February
or anyother persons in authority. And 1842, and never, as this deponenthas heard
this deponent further saith, that the fact and. beieveseithercontradicted or qualified.
of the statements and speeches hereinbe- I And this deponent saith that, on the 8th
fore mentioned being printed and spoken day of February 1842, the day appointed
with the toleration of' the magistrates of for Sir Robert Peel's motion on theCornManchester aforesaid, and with the ap- laws, 600 delegates or deputies were, as this
a'idsuportof he aidAItiheard
wd. support of the said AD * deponient has Znoren and believes, sent up to
probtionproatin
corn-law League, of which said League, London u
several-of the said Magistrates of -Man- Anti-corn-law- League, from the various
chester were then, and still are, members provincial associations of the said League,
of the, council as aforesaid, and without and assembled at the Crown and Anchor
any, prosecution, interruption, or warning Tavern in the Strand, in London aforeby the Queen's government, naturally said, and.thatone of the said delegates,Mr.
and necessarily induced the belief, that TAUNTt)N Of Coventry, at the meeting
as extensive a latitude of political discus- of the said delegates or deputies, at the
3ion would be allowed to other persons; said Crovn and Anchor Tavem, on the
and that no prosecution would be com- following day, the 9th day of February,
nienced against any speeches or publica- 1842, being the day appointed, as aforetions which did not exceed those herein- sadfo SrRore Pe ' ono
h
before mentioned in commenting upon, corn-laws-made a speech, of wvhich the
or complaining of, the present system of followving, as this deponent has heard
society.
And this deponent further and believes, is a portion, that is to
saith, that lie has never used or been say
chared wth
singlanuageat ll a"Let
them remember that there were periods
proaching in violence Or sedition that
whic ha
herinbforebee staed.Andof patience, that to those who were starved out
this deponent further saith-, that the said of existence society had violated its duties. Th e
members of the council of the Anti-Corn - social compact supposed social security and
law Leagrue have been permitted for, a social justice; and, if the laws did not give that
long time past to make, and to sanction justice and that security, the compact was broken
by teirpresnceand apprbatonand allegiance to it dissolved. ,The Legislature
speeches and addresses of a very violent seldom~ yielded anything save hut to fear; they
tendency without the slightest punish- 4hould not, therefore, be too demure in their
.tnent, restraint, or observation, and that, demands. It was only when murmurs ran from
in or about the month of February, 1842. mouth. to mouth, and the passionate whiteness
at-a meeting of the conference of the said- of indignation an&. insulted human nature was

406

language,

deponent

as this
ther, united as one wan anI is:ore cause -wi,
1the following
millions discovered their moral strength and has heard and believes, that is to say

" That three weeks would try the mettle of
determination-then it was that hypocrites in
power became honest-then it was that the his countrymen. Why, would they submit to
tyrant prepared himself to grant concessions. be STARVED, and put upon short allowance, by
But, if the Legislature opposed the people, they thirty or forty thousand men ? He was sure
would commence an agitation all over
country for the thorough and complete

thb

purging

of that corrupt house."

inzsignifcant,

both morally
that if they knew how
and physically, those thirty thousand or forty

thousand aristocrats

and squires were, they

them.,ut, though really inAnd that the said speeds.-as this depo- .would nottear were not conscious of any weaksignificant, they
nient has iseard and believes, was received
with tremendous cheers; and that thore
were present at its delivery several county
and borough magistrates, not one o
whom, as this deporientIhas heard and
helieves, offered to it the shlitest disap-

probation or interruption. And this de.
ponent further saith, that, at a subsequent
mneeting, held on the same day at Brown's
(offee House, in Palace-yard, Westmiuster, composed of the said delegates, or
deputies, the folowing resolution was Ptasexd by the said delegiates or deputes, that
is to say:
"That, in the opinion of this meeting, the
measure just announced btyHer lajeuty's go-

vernment on the subject of the Corn Laws, so
far from holding out the slightest prospect of
any relief of the distress of the country, is an
insult to a patient aind a suffering people, and
the depties view such a proposal as an indication
that the landlord-aristocracy of this country are
destitute of all sympatiy for the poor, and are
resolved, if permitted by an outragedpeople, to
persist in a course of selfish policy which will involve the destruction of every interest in the
country."

And that the~ said speech of Mr. TA UNTfONY of Coventr, and the said resolution
Of the said delegates, were reported in the
yo Ckg£'ron ic/c newspaper of' the
next (:av,, thl- 10th day of February, 1842.
And this deponent further saitls, that on
the I Ith day of' Febru~ary, 1842, there
was another niceting of'the said deleo'ates
ait the said Crowni and Anchor Tavern
and that, att the said mieeting, RiCHARD
CO0BD FEN,)Esq., spoke very violently, as tlsis
deponent has heard and believes, against
The said Corn-law, and threatened the
government with the exhibition of physical fiorce, for thc purp~ose of terrifying
the governtment to a repeael of tbe said
Corn-law;

anld, in particrilar~that he used

ness; they were as confident in their strength
as they had been five years. since; they wouldI
.not shrink one atom ;'and,until these men WER
FRIGTENED, the people would never obtai
justice. Were they prepared to make sacrifices,
and to undergo sufferings, to carry thisquestiou.?
[he time was not far off when they might be
called upon to make sacrifices, and to undergo
sufferings. The time might soon come when
they inight be called upon to enquire, as Christian men, whether an oligarchy which has
Uisurped the government, placed its foot en the
crown,land trampled down the people-how far
such an oligarchical usurpation was deserving of
their moral and religious support. As soon as
the bill shouldbecome the law of the land, by
the physical force of a brute majority against
reason, then would the time come when he
should feel it his duty to secede, as far as he
could do, morally, from giving all voluntary support, whether pecuniary or morally, to such a
government. The administrators of the law
might enforce the law-he could not resist the
law-but there must be somebody to administer
the law, and somebody to enforce the law; and
hie thought that, three weeks hence, the whole
people would thoroughly understand the real
bearings of the bread-tax question, that theyr
would not want phyvsical force while they were
unanimous."
And that, at the said meeting on the said
11th day of February, 1842, JOSEP'H
STURGE, of Birmingham,- in the county?

of' Warwick, iwho, as this deponent
has heard and believes, is a memnlber of the said Anti-Corn-law League,
anid who is not, as this deponenit has
heard and believes, a Chartist, made use
of the following language or to that
effect, as this deponent has heard and
believes, that is to say
"6He would not hesitate for a single moment
to say, that the laws supported by the aristo-

407
cracy were such that the greatest despot in true spirit of Christian feeling and gool citizen.
Europe could nqt support them. And he thought ship, were to close their mills and shops, and to
that it was on the 9th day of February when tell the people, ' We cannot employ you, because
this proposition was made in the House of we cannot reap any fruit from your labour-we
Commons, that the CONTEST bogan between the cannot secure to capital, skill, ingenuity, and labour their just reward;' the great body of peoaristocracy and the people."
And that the sad speeches of the said ple thus thrown out of food and employment in
RICHARD COBDEN and JOSEPH STURGE the face of Heaven, would soon vindicate their
were received with loud cheers ; and parti- rights and send the Tories to the right about"
cularly those portions thereof which proAnd this depqnent further saith, that, in
phecied, or recommended, or alluded to, the 84th numberofthe said Anti-corn-law
physical force and violence as a means Circular, published on the 10th daff
of obtaining a repeal of the Corn-law; March 1842, there is anADDREss to the
and that there were present at the de-' people of Great Britin from the Execulivery of such speeches, several members tive committee of delegates to the antiof Parliament andMAGISTRATES, who vo- corn-law conference from which the fblciferously cheered and signified their ap- lowing are extracts, that is to say
,,
Famine must capitulte with monopoly, and
probation of the same, and that none of
those present at such meeting expressed, submit to the injustice which relaxes at that
s
e
b
as this deponent has, heard and believes point only, where
as this deponent has heard and be ieves,
it apprehends that enormous
deponent further saith that at the said prices would ensure the re-action of frantic c4esconference of delegates, WILIAt RATH- peration.... You pay fifty millions for governl
BONE GRaEG, a leading member of the ment, and that very payment is converted into
said League, made the followng observa- machinery for extorting fifty millions more to
tions, as this deponent heard and bellevesg sustain the ascendancy of, a landed aristocracy.
Y purchase government, and are cheated of
You
that is to say
" Gentlemen, what we are to do at the present your bargain; you reeive misgovernment incrisis I confess I do not very clearly see; but stead, and the fraud robs you of your rights and
I hope that our delegates will be able to devise multiplies your sufferings. It is said that yoursome means of compelling justice from the nig- selves have sanctioned the system under which
gard and reluctant hands of government. There you groan. The whole worldknows better. The
is but one remedy else in our hands, and it is one present House of Commons is notoriously not a
which most certainly will be acted upon unless "free, fair, and equal representation of the peoprevented by a timely remedy. If the present ple. The cost of a majority in it, for the cause
Gorn laws continue, or are only so altered that of monopoly at the last general election, is said
the present depressed state of trade becomes per- ,to have been a million and a half of pounds stermanent, not less than 500,000 persons, half a ling. The exact amount is of no consemillion of people, must be sent back to the agri- quence; such outlay is no profit to the commucultural districts, to be maintained by the land- nity; it is the profitable insurance of rapa.cious
lords; and they would very speedily eat up the monopoly; no trade is benefitted thereby, but
that which thrives on the corruption ofsoul and
rental
kwhole of the land."
that, at the said meeting, the follow- body. Public morals are debased that public
And
ing observations were made by one DUFFY, money may be plundered. Your commerce,
a lecturer then high in the confidence your manufactures, your profits, your employand estimation of the said League, that ments, your wages, your means of subsistence,
are bartered by the profligate totheprofligate wealis to say:"Let him remind Sir Robert Peel, that not ten thy. You are sold; the rights of industry, capital
years had elapsed since the masters of Paris and enterprize are sold; your own food and
closed their shops, shut up their places of la- your children's prospects are sold; and the unbour, and threw the population into the streets,

holy bargain is called REPRESENTATIO N ! Let

which sent a tyrant king about his business. If
the master-manufacturers of Manchester, of
Sheffield, and of Birmingham, those great hives
of industry, acting with all concord, and in the

the transaction stand in its true colours."
And that, after some other language in
the same style and tone, thesaidADDRESS
proceeds thus:IE

408
' But their will is law. The monopolists are
masters of the legislature and the government;
and they are determined to work out to the uttermost their experiment upon the extent of the
nation's resources, and of the nation's endu-

and that, at the said meeting, the said
JOHN BROOKs made a speech, in which,
speaking of the aristocracy, lie used the
following language, that is to say :
"Is it not monstrous that they hould legisrance."
late for one class, that class themselves, and
And this deponent saith, that the follow- at the expence of the manufacturing and con ing is the list of the said Executive com- mercial people, and of all the other classes ?"
mittee from whom the said address And that at the said meeting, the said Rev.
purports to emanate, and Which is Mr. MAssIE, dissenting minister, made a
published in the 83rd number of the said speech in which he used the following
language, that is to
say:circular, that is to sayv:-Mr. James
Wilson, Colonel 'Thompson, Mr. P. A.
" It was to endeavour to alienate the workingTaylor (by which said P. A. Taylor the people from the manufacturers; to make an
said address is signed by order of the impression upon the people that the manufacsaid conference) Messrs. Sidney Smith, turers received their wealth from the blood, and
Scoble, and J.R. BlaCk, M.D.,Lon- bones,
and sinews of the working-people, while
don; Messrs. J. Kershaw, William Rawthese aristocrats themselves lived upon the
son, W. Evans, E. Armitage, A.Prentice,
plunder which, by these laws, they wrung from
S. Lees, and Rev. J. W. Massie, Manboth the manufacturing and the working
chester;
Mr. J. Stansfield, Leeds;
Messrs. J. Milligan, and T G. Clayton, classes, making the former the instruments to
Bradford; M. J. Dixon, Carlisle; Mr. extract it from the latter."
And that, in concluding the said meetH. Ashworth, Bolton; Mr.Joseph Sturge,
Mr. Ball, Coventry; ing, JoiN BRIGHT, ofRochdale, the chairBirmingham;
Messrs. D. M'Laran and J. Aytoun, man thereof, a man' of great influence and
Edinburgh; Mr. W. Buchanan, Glas- much wealth, used the following langow; Rev. J. Burder, and Mr. J. C. guage, or to the following effect, as this
Biggs, Deponent has heard and believes, that is to
Stroud; Mr. W.
Symons,
Leicester; Mr. J. Akroyd, Halifax; Mr. say:
" He knew how the people, in this district,
J. Batley, Huddersfield; Rev. WV. Williams and G. Evans, Esq., Carnarvon; had slumbered; and it was only because the
W. Ibbotson Esq., and Rev. R. S. Bailey, _ristocracy knew that theywere not all awake
Sheffield; Rev. W. Roaf, Wigan; 'Nr that they dared to insult and trample upon
Morris, Esq., Halifax; Messrs. E.Wat- them." And;
kins, and C. Edward Rawlins, Manchester;
" He believed he might state, that some proRev. H. Ranton, Kelso; Rev. W. Lowe, ject, of a very comprehensive nature would be
Forfar; several of whoin are magistrates, submitted to the manufacturing classes of Lanmayors and aldermen, entrusted with the cachire, and the adjoining counties, before long;
administration of the law, of great wealth, such a plan as, if fully carried out, would, at
and whose exampleis ofpowerfulinfluence.
any rate, strike terror into the hearts of those
And this deponent further saidthat,
who had lived, and were living, upon the
on the 1st day of March, 1842, a meetplunder of the people."
ing of the merchants, manufacturers, and
others, of Manchester aforesaid and its And this deponent further saith, that at
vicinity, was held at Manchester aforesaid, a meeting of the said Anti-corn-law
and that, at the said meeting were present League, at Manchester aforesaid, held on
the before mentioned JOHN BROOKs, Sir the 22nd day of March, 1842, a PROTEST
THOMAS POTTER, Mr. ASHwoaTri, and was proposed by the Rev. Mr. MASSIE
other magistrates of Manchester aforesaid, aforesail, and passed unanimously, conand that, at the said meeting, a resolution demning the Corn-law Bill then introwas unanimously passed, declaring, that duced by Sir Robert Peel; from which
Sir Robert Peel's proposed modification of said protest the following is an extract,
the corn-law was "a bitter mockery and that is to say:cruel insult, unworthy of any statesman
"We do hereby solemnly protest against so
to propose and of the people to accept," cruel a mockery of perishing millions-so anti-

409
national a scheme for the destruction of the tisfied with the milk and water system they
commercial interests of this commercial coun- had so long pursued."
try-and so blasphemous a violation of the law And that, by another speaker, Mr. T.
of. God ..... And such legislative robbery MOORE, as this deponent has heard and
by
as, the taxation of the breid-eaters for the believes, the following language, or to
benefit of the landowners, statres the honest that effect, was used
' The land was full of abundance. All that
children of:industry, to gratifyfthe luxurious
cravings of a heartless and pampered oligarchy." stood between a perishing people and plenty,
And- that at the said meeting the said was the inhuman and tyrannical laws of the
JOHN BROOKS, magistrate of Manchester, country, supported by a few, for their own profit."
as .-aforesaid, was chairman, and, as this
that another speaker, the Rev. Mr.
deponent has heard and believes, ex- And K
W
sed flhe
pressed no disapprobation thereof, or of HA Es, at the said conference,
and that the said following language, or to that effect, tha
the said protest:
meeting and protest were published in is to say
" He believed that in the inanufactring
the 85th number of the said htti-bread
Tax Circular; and that, in the said districts they were on the verge of dis85th number of the said circular, is a turbances which would not be repressed ex.
leading article intitled, " The Income Tax cept by shedding blood, because the obstinacy
and the Bread Tax," from which the fol- of their governors led them to look on these
calm and unruffled eyes, and the
things ith
lowing is an extract, that is to say :-eyes, and they
"The Parliament may be considered a things with calm and unruffled
a erl ntrades'
ionassembly, would employ the force in their hands, the
landowner's club, or trades' union assembly,
ice and soldiry of the country, to repress
of
soldiery other means to repress
passing laws to enrich themselves by the im- polce and than takethecountryto repress
tumult, ratlier
poverishment of the millions they pretend to it. .. Let those persons take care how they
represent."
the benefits of ProviAnd this deponent further saith, that a continue to counteract
Let them look to what had been the
conference of the members of the said dence.
Anti-corn-law JLeague met at Herbert's fate of other countries, where the rights of the
Hotel, Palace Yard, Westminster, on the people were thus held back. Let them look to
5th day of July last, and that they con- the example of France in the last century-of
tinued their sittings from day to day till old Rome-of Greece-and many other counthe lstdayifAungustlast, and that, amongst tries. But the lust of Mammon had a more
the said conference of delegates were powerful influence on the minds of the aristopresent, as this deponent has heard and cracy than the experience of history. The
believes, ALDERMAN SHUTTLEWORTH, Duke of Richmond had, on a former occasion,
ALDERMAN said, that, if the Corn-laws were repealed, he
KERSHAW,
ALDERMAN
BRooKs, and ALDERMAN ARM:ITAGE, of would flee to a foreign land. Ile (Mr. Hawkes)
Manchester aforesaid; and Sir RALPH would say to the Duke, ' unless you repeal the
PENDLEBURY and several other magis- Corn-laws you shall be compelled to flee.' He
Hawkes) wondered if it had occurred to
trates; and that at the meeting of the said
conference, between the said 5th day the Duke to think, that both himself and the
of July and 1st day of August last members of his order would have to flee if
their lives."
several violent and inflammatory speeches they would save their lives."
they would save
were made by the various speakers,
immediately after
that is to sayone by Mr. GRUNDYAnd that, in following
in the words following or to the follow- the said speech, and in commenting
thereon, the Rev. Dr. PERRY, as this deing effect, that is to say :of men by their actions, and he ponent has heard and believes, used the
"He judged
was satisfied that Sir Robert Peel, and his party, following language, or to that effect, that
to
cared not for the starvation of the people, so is say :" Now, he must say, that self-preservation
long as they could drain them of their resources. It was high time for the people of was the first law of nature, and that he who
this country to coalesce and demand, by firm neglected that law, who acted not up to that
remonstrance, and uplifted hands, the restora- dictate, and did not preserve his life, was
tion of their rights. The country was dissa.. guilty of the crime which all were forbidden

1(Mr.

41
to commit.-murder. Sooner than suffer himself company, said, that if one hunatu persons catf
or his children to starve, he (Dr. Perry) would lots, and the lot should fail upon him, he wouli
take the lot to deprive Sir Robert' Peel of lfIe
take from the table of the Prime Minister."

And that GEORGE THoIMPSON, a lecturer
employed by the said Anti-corn-law
League, thus expressed himself, as this
deponent has heard and believes, at the
said last-mentioned conference:"But still the question returns, what have
we realized ? and we are forced to reply-nothing. In effect, the Government and Parliament have said, 'We know the people are
starving, but we will give them no bread; we
admit and admire their patience, and will reward it by leaving them to die.' . . . We have
stood between the hungry and those who created
the famine; and if at last the aristocracy of this
kingdom rush upon their own doom, their
blood be upon their own heads, and the blood

He felt convinced that 'o such attempt ought
to be made under any pretence whatever; but
he was persuaded of this, that when he, Sir
Robert Peel, went to his grave, there would be
but few to shedone tear overit."
And that, by the said Rev. Mr. Bailey,
the following language, atthe said lastmentioned conference, was used, as he,
this deponent, has heard and believes,
that is to say :"It was not words they said would move Parliament, but FoRcE they should have if they
did not change their system."
And that, at the said conference the following language was used by Mr. GAsKILL, of Warrington, that isto say:

of those who may fall in the struggle forthatKILew
"

Tn

onhisto
ar
of hi.tnrv
rnrp

say
nothin," mnr.

bread which God had provided, but which they horribl
be found than the death of Ugohave withheld."
lino; and in what did the conduct of the tyrant
And that at the said last-mentionied con- who starved him to death differ from that of the
the English aristocracy? The Italian was actuated
by a feeling of revenge-the English aristocracy
by a sordid feeling of selfish interest. The Italian
left his single victim to starve; the English
aristocracy starved the whole nation. It had
been proposed by one whom he would call Mr.
Gallows Knight, (meaning, as this deponent bebe an OUTBREAK throughout a large extent of the
lieves, Mr. Gally Knight,) to hang the prophets,
manufacturing districts in the ensuing winter, but he would have the landlords to beware in
unless remedial measures were adopted. He time."
ference,

HOLLAND

HOLE, Esq.,

Boroughreeve of Salford, aforesaid, in
Manchester, used the following language,
or to that effect, as this deponent has
heard and believes:"The strong probability was, that there would

felt it hard to state, that a number of the districtmagistrates, apprehending this outbreak, were
determined to resign their commissions, and not
to permit themselves to be the tools of the aristocracy."
And that, at the said last-mentioned conference, the following language, or to that
effect, was used, as this deponent has
heard and believes, by Mr. WHITEHEAD,
of Leeds, that is to say:-" He saw no difference between the man who
met another on the highway and presented a
pistol at his breast---he saw not the slightest
difference between that man and the Government, who, for selfish purposes, were prepared to
sacrifice millions of their fellow-subjects."
And that, at the said last-mentioned conference, the following language, or to that
effect, was used, as this deponent has
heard and believes, bythe Rev. Mr. BAILEY
of Sheffield:"He heard of a gentleman, who, in private

And that, at the said conference, the following language, or to that effect, was
used, as this deponent has heard and believes, by MR. TAUNTON, of Coventry,
that is to say :" He felt reluctant to present himself again to
the conference, believing, as he did, that the callous-hearted aristocracy were determined to goad
the people to rebellion, in order to govern by the
sword. * * He was astonished at the apathy
of the metropolis on this subject. Would the
people never learn to rely on their own energy,
and demand to be fed themselves, while they feed
others. It appeared to him that the time was
passed for talking. The time was come to Do
something, and he thought they ought to proceed
at once to appoint a committee of public safety
in the metropolis."
And that, at the said last-mentioned conference, the following language, or to that
effect, was used, as this deponent has
heard and believes, by MR. WILLIAM

411
NELSTROP, the mayor of Stockport, that- claims of justice and humanity until eompelle
by an oppressed and injured people."
is to say :" I wish the government to know, I wish Sir
Robert Peelto know, I wishher Majesty's Ministers to know, that the inhabitants of this borough
have endured their unparalleled distress with
unparalleled patience. There is, however, a
point beyond which human endurance cannot
go; and, unless some means are taken to
relieve the distress of the poor of Stockport, I
wish the country to know, I wish Sir Robert
Peel to know, I wish the government to know,
that I cannot, and will not, be responsible for
the consequences which ray follow from the
present state of things."

And that, at the said last-mentioned conference, the before-mentioned JoHN BowRING, member of Parliament, author of
the verses commencing "Starvation" and

ending "God," used the following lan-

guage, or to that.effect, as this deponent

heard and believes, of the House of Commons :-" No eloquence, no, not even the trumpet of
an Archangel, he believed, would produce any
effect on that assembly ; and he feared that they
must look now only to the hunger and starvation
of the people as the means of FORcaNo them to
do justice."

And that, at the said conference, several
letters were read, in one of which are the
following expressions:-

And in another of which letters are the
following expressions :" The shopkeepers and tradesmen have given
up all hopes of improving their condition by
remonstrances and petitioning, memorializing and
deputationizing, and bending the slavish knee to
tyrants who convert the statements of the people's
condition into food for amusement and ridicule,
who brutishly laugh at the tattered garments
of the poor, and who mock their heartbreaking
representations in giving them stones when they
ask for bread. The shopkeepers have unanimously declared that their only hope rests im
circumstances which are fast approachingto a
crisis. Those of Birmingham resolved, last
evening, with furrowed brows and cheeks flushed
with the glow of patriotic indignation, that they
would hereafter stand with folded arms, and
watch until that period when Englishmen knowing their rights will dare to maintain them.
What hope is there? None, at least the men of
Birmingham cannot see any. With such dismal
prospects, then, and with so little chance of
success, my fellow-townsmen have retired, for
the present, in gloomy despair; but ready at
a moment's notice to join in raptures any great
national movement which may be made with a
fair prospect of success."
And this deponent further saith, that at
the said last-mentioned conference the
said RICHARD COBDEN made a speech,

" The League and Anti-monopoly associations,
with the assistance of the colliers, have the power
of compelling the aristocracy, in less than one from which, as this deponent has heard and
month, to abolish the Corn-laws altogether, and believes, the following is a correct extract,
to compel them also to grant the People's Charthat is to say :ter. Let the colliers in all parts of England
" Whatever they could do to embarrass thegocease work for a month, and the thing is done;
they have only to insist on the measures before vernment they were bound to do. They owed
they go to work again. This is the most simple them no respect; they were entitled to none.
and efficient measure that could be adopted to get The government was based upon corruption, and
all we want, without spilling a drop of blood, or the offspring of vice, corrwption,intimidtion,and
causing any commotion of any kind. The city bribery. The majority of the House of Commons
of London would be without fuel, and all was supported by the violation of morality and
ther concerns must come to a stand till it was religion. He said for such a government they
SETTLED.
should entertain no respect whatever. He would
And in another of which letters are the assist the Anti-Corn-law League allin his power

following expressions :to embarrass the government."
'They (the working men) are now daily ap- And this deponent further saith, that the
proaching a stage of suffering, which will, very chairman of the said conference was Mr.
likely, produce what may convince Sir Robert P. A. TAYLOR, and that, in opening the
Peel and his colleagues that the distress is real."

said conference, at its commencement, the

And in another of which letters are the said P. A. TAYLOR, as this deponent has
heard and believes, used the following
foltowing expressions:" The powers that be will never yield to the language, or to that effect:-

412
enduring, and to the utter ruin which senis
rapidly approaching, to gratify the grasping
rapacity of a landlord-legislature, is neither to
be anticipated nor desired. I trust they will use
no violence, but not submit to be starved; A at
p
rty and-life, but not svjfrr
they-willres
And that'the said P.'A. TAYLO R rgularly their children toperish by famin e;and if, whcn
time
pi'sidd ay~o ay t te sttngs the tme arrives,- that private property has becfom
op
'prosided from day tob day af,te sitti ' s come a nuice,
the struggle-for existencei;
the
df i d last-inentioned conference,
froin the said 5th day of-.July last, to the repressed by bloodshed; by whatever name that
sid 1st day of August last, being the Ibloodshed may
the eye of reason, of
ludicature,i
month immeditely precedig t
.strike for wages and the Charter as afore- justice, of posterity, and of God, it willreceive
Laid, at and in the neighbourhood of its true appellation, and be stamped with the
th
Manchester aforesaid, and atat the guilt of MURDER. Ihave only to say, an adloe f the said conference on the said ,dress.willhe submitted to you for your ap.st1day
of1August, the sid 2 . A.TAY proval, and this conference will thea be di_tolt'as this deponent ha's heard and be- solved."
i
lieves, addressed tse said'last-mentionedA
rhrsib
eoe
; '
~a
co 'ei6in h fllowinglanguage, o And' :this that is to sav, on the 1st day
or afterwxards,
conference in the 0o
Augus,
of
to that effect, that is to say :-"The cry of suffering and distress would make,itself heard, and if that distress wvere not speedi.
ly relieved, he believed that that distress would
-iake itself heard in a VOICE OF THUNDER, and
wouldfrighten the government and the legisla*urc, from its propriety."

"Everything that could be done to represent C e ce of the National Anti-corn-law
of th United Kingp
t
to the government the condition of trade, andL
the destitution of the people, has been attempted I dor," w
at various interviewis with its members, and the and' believes, proposed and seconded and
resiuult has been nthi' &.o They have been told carried; and that the said address cans
by individuals from all parts of 'the country, and tains theoo
engaged in every description of manufacture,
that their trade is declining,. their capital dimin- say
are about to separate.W would ad:ishing, and their uinemployed Work people starvdress you upon the positionof our cause. In
ja; that foreign -countries are offering
forwant of which the people are perishing, in 1February last, we assembled in this metropolis
overnmen
exchangefor those manufactures for Which there to uge up
is otherise no demand. They have been con-or-laws.The
juredin vain. They seemed resolved upon main- band of mo
tamning the iniquitous Corn-law, which aggran. lative power disregarded our renonstrances, and
dizes -their own wealth and deprives the peoplelageatorwnis.Tytiupdfra
an fod,
of eplomen ad kepig te pacebrief season, and ag sin sanctioned the miseries of
htmeorrg en
of theI country,. by repressing the frantic attemptsfaiebstue.
namrs
eksft
of the famishing to supply themselves and chil- i at u poet
dren wi th food, by force. Our dut y is done: and ohstinate silence. The question is now narwe have exposed the evil, suggested the remedy, rowed to one of might against right.. .. We
denounced the wrong, and warned the Govern- wol a oyu oktoyu ersnaie
met
fth
oneuecs ftesitngi ta the majority of them have basely sold you. We
.men oftheconsquecesof in hat hae wrued the gayernmn;w aeisrc
prsitin
wrong; and it remains for us to return to ourhaeaaen;whversrc depend upon your intelligence
constituents, and tell them that all our efforts to ted the people, we
obtain justice for tlsem have failed, and that we and upon the FEARS Of the Monopolists. Prvifwat
e
ra5ienpet.Afw
,can hold out to them no prospect of improve- dec
the
ment, and no hope of relief. It is fearful to con- and title have opposed their mandate to
more
template the future ; that a great and highly will of heaven. "Shall mortal man be
civilized nation will finally STFFER its prosperity.just thaGod ?"es ad
wsige
adadeswssge
a ndta h
to be blighted, and its progress obstructed by
TAYLOR, as chairman
faction of landowners is not to be believed, by the said P.. A.
That the millions of industrious and intelligent ar- Of the said conference, and was SUP ti-sans who ought to be the glory of our country- -ported by JOsEPH HUME, C. P. VIL-

as they have been the creators of its wealth-will

LIERS, RiCHARD COBDEN,

quietly submit to the destitution they are now

O'CONNELL

Esqits. and

and

DANIEL

members ot

413
Parliament and by other persons of influence.
And this deponent furtler saith, that
on the 8th day of July, 1842, a speech
was delivered, as this deponent has heard
and believes, by the .said RICHARD COBDEN, and that the said speech contained
,the following wordsl
"It is my firm belief that, withinsix months,
we shall have populous districts in the north in a
state of, social dissolution. 'You may talk of rc-

pressing the people by the military; but what
military force would be equal to such an emnergency. The military will not avail. Ido be
not
lieve that the people will break out unless they
are absolutely deprived of food: if you are not
prepared with a rernedy, THEY WILL BE JUST!VIED IN TAKING FOOD FOR THEMSELVES AND

deponeut has heard and believesthat thlicence, so as hereinbefore stated, permit.
ted- to th, said mayors, magistrate , alder
men, boroughreeves, members of parliameat, and other persons of influence, fortune, and station, would not be pn-initted
to the. said workng claSSe3, and that they,
the siasses
outed and imprisoned if they followed
the exampleIso set to them, by tha persons so placed in authority oertheIn;
4
eponent has lead d
nor, asthis
believes was any notice ever given to the
said workingclasses-that the gvernment
intendedto make any difference in their
obtaintreatment of languagdie
in; the repeal of the Corn-laws, and landi

tue

dom for the people.

THEIR FAMILIES."

And this deponent further sth , that
the said speech was immediately after-

And this deponent further saith, that

fprosecuti
orsedito ar
te
er or by i
before the commencement of the said tioa rarely,'the direction 'of the Queen's
a
stoppage of vork at Manchester-and, its~overnm
neighbourhood aforesaid, published at
ingo classes have no means.of judging the
o comlment or criticism or comaforesaid,by heextent
Mchester Manheserafoesadby the said GADSBY se
Of
wards, that is to say, ,ess than oiie mouth

the printer and publisher of the said
nti-Corn-lat Lea que, and that more plait which is pratlegathaut it
than EIGHT THOUSAND copies of suchsy, i eapeate
currincg
p
le exetb b oa
speech were, as deponent has heard and servingT the extent to which, the said go.
oen
fdsgad-sby; vernmeut permits political discussion and
publislied'y the sad
believes,beiees
pblshdbyth si4Gdly
and that several thousands ofsue speech strorig
e are
P
rectiglnuaet0
ere, as this deponent has heard and bei
rprscI
lieves,, gratuitously distributed amongst wihu nerptin
the distressed'

and

destitute

working

.classes in Manchester and its neighbourhood aforesaid.
And this deponent further saith, that
he has heard and believes that none
of the said magistrates, mayors,- aldermen, boroughreeves, members of
parliament, and others, makingr, publishing, and sanctioning the said hereinbefore mentioned speeches and publications, have been removed from their
office as administrators of the law; and
that the same speeches and publications
have been repeatedly brought under the
notice of the ministers and law-officersI
of the Queen's government,
And this deponent further saith, that no
votice or intimation was at an~y time
given to the working classes, as he, this

And this deponent further saithi, that

all the before-mentioned' numfbers of the
.4nti-bread Tax Circular, 'from whichl
the liereinbefore stated' speecbes, sentences., language and paragraphs have been
extracted, were at., and immediately previous and subsequent to, the said stoppage
of work at MNanchester and its neighbourhood aforesaid, extensively and gratuitously circulated amongst the working
classes in Manchester and its neighbourhood aforesaid, by the direction and at the
expense, as this deponent has heard and
believes, of the members of the Anti-cornlaw League, and that the sa4 workingr
classes were at the time of such gratuitous
circulation of the said numbers of the
said Ilnti-bread lax Circular, in the
deepest poverty, misery and destitution.

CAUSES

OF THE

OUTBREAK.

The foregoing affidavit, sworn by Cooper, and which, had he failed in arresting
judgment on the fifth count, I was prepared to submit as my affidavit, will considerably limit my enquiry into the causes of the outbreak of last autumn. However,
the national, nay the universal, catastrophe that was averted, the great danger from
which the cause of Chartism was saved, and the personal peril which its best friends
so narrowly escaped, demand from me a full, a searching, and complete investigation of the whole question.
I am aware that it has been suggested, hinted, rumoured, and industriously circulated, that some of the conference delegates acted with bad faith and with malice
aforethought. This charge, however, come from what quarter it may, I unhesitatingly stamp with the name of slander. 1 think T should have been as likely as
any other person to have discovered the lurking treachery had it existed; but, alas!
it is the damning sin of politicians to lay personal claim to all the good that arises
from the projects of others, and to denounce with unsparing bitterness the miscarriage
of undertakings in which -they were participants. I set out then with the reiteration
of my public and private declaration-that there existed no treachery in the delegate
far as to aver that neither Cartledge or Griffin entered that
conference-nay, I go
conference with any evil design, however revenge and the hope of gain may have
subsequently operated upon the one, and a hope of self-preservation upon the other.
These remarks do not refer to opinions conscientiously entertained and published
under honest conviction; but they do apply to the more cowardly and dangerous
mode of inventing calumny and whispering it in private societies, until, like a snowball, it gains strength inits course and ultimately becomes an accepted truism, the
accused having no means ofjustification.
It was necessary to make these preliminary observations in order that the conference, by whose boldness and sagacity Chartismi was saved from the conspiracy of
the League, should stand fairly before the country. In developing the origin of the
outbreak, it will be necessary to direct the public mind to a calm consideration of
he machinery by which the League and their hirelings proposed to accomplish their
double purpose; first, a total repeal of the Corn-laws by a physical revolution; and,
secondly, the formatim.of an administration out of the free trade ranks: for, however they may have professed in Scotland and elsewhere a disregard of the political
creed of those who should repeal the Corn-laws, yet be assured that, as the Reform

416
Bill led to the formation of an administration from the ranks of the reform party, so
would the free-traders seek the same means for securing the practical carrying out of
free trade principles. If the Charter was carried to-morrow, as a matter of course
the country would look for a Chartist government; and as it ever has been, so
It ever will be, that the political party in the ascendant will carry their power
to the, formation of a government: from their own ranks, however plausibly
they may withhold a portion of their design while struggling for the attainment
of any substantive measure. The one, indeed the only, stumbling-block in the
way of the League to effect the latter object, was the bold and unequivocal
refusal of Lord John Russell to make an unprincipled agitation the road to political power-and much as I have had reason to quarrel with many acts of Lord
John Russell, I have no hesitation in honestly dedaring that he has satisfied my
mind that there is a price at which he would not purchase power.
The schemes by which the desired object was to be achieved have been openly
published in the newspapers of all shades of politics; in the liberal press with encomium, in the Tory papers for unfriendly comment; however, there never has
been ,a fair. analysis published of the manner in which the machinery was to be
arranged and the uses to which it was to be applied for the attainment of their first
and primary object, a repeal of the Corn-laws by violence. I think, however, that
I shall be enabled to throw some new light upon that subject, by merely pointing
to the speeches of some of the open conspirators, and to the overt acts of those who
varred upon us in mask.
My principal object in my present uidertaking is to justify the innocent and to
saddle upon the guilty the weight of their own crime. As I hall be compelled to
:introduce the part which the delegates who assembled at Birmingham were destined
to take in the struggle for a repeal of the Corn-laws, but, more especially, the use
that it was intended to make of the Chartist body in that conference, which was
originally to have assembled under the auspices of Mr. Sturge, prior to the outbreaks, this may be the most fitting place to develope one feature of the case which
has not yet been subjected to comment. In searching for the most assailable points
through which a, total cessation of labour might be effected, it fell to the lot of the
League to propose a plan by which all labour might be suspended by a "couip de
main." Argument had failed; discussion was not permitted; the organized
body of Chartists were not to be entrapped by the glib philosophy of hired, interested, and unprincipled demagogues, and, consequently, a project was proposed,
by which the whole labour of the country should be suspended by compulsion.
That project was the stoppage of all mining operations. Let me here transcribe
from the affidavit, the exact terms in which this project was couched.
" The League and the Anti-monopolist Association, with the assistance of the
.colliers, have the power of COMPELLING the aristocracy, in less than one month, to
abolish the Corn-laws altogether and to COMPEL them also to grant the "'People's
C.harter." Let the colliers in all parts of England cease work for a month, and
the thing is done; they have only to insist on the measures before they go to work
Sagain. This is the most simple and efficient measure that could be adopted to get
all we want, without spilling a drop of blood, or causing any commotion of any
kind. The city of London would be without fuel, and all other concerns MUST
COME TO A STAND

till it was settled."

417
Now I ask, in the name of justice, in the[name of decency, in the
name of common sense,, how such an .announcement from such a quarter
was left wholly unnoticed, while those who never used such language have
been made the victims of government wrath and persecution? The Chartists
approve the continuance of a cessation from work by those who have been driven
from work, but do not recommend a sin4le man to leave his employment, while
the League conspirators publish a scheme for COMPELLING all to cease labour.

Let us now argue upon this part of the subject.
Every man who
has taken an active part in Chartist agitation is aware that the non-adoption
of Chartist principles by the colliers has long been a source of deep regret;
in fact, that the colliers: wee not only not friendly to Chartist principles; but,
on the contrary, were pposed to them, or heard them expounded with apparent
indifference.
Very shortly, however, after the commencement of the above
pioject, we find a vigorous agitation started in the mining districts, and at the head
of which are some of the disciples of Mr. Joseph Sturge. As a matter ot course
it would not have been prudent to state openly to the colliers that the object in inducing them to cease from labour, was that thereby a repeal of the corn-laws may
be effected. But the plan was so to inflame their minds by a species of fanatical
hypocrisy and declamation, that they should threaten in the first instance, to see
what effect that would produce. This plot was carried to a certain length in parts
of Staffordshire by the preachers of Sturgism, when the most zealous in the Chartist
cause took advantage of the existing excitement and mixed up the question of the
Charter with the general question of wages, that upon which the Sturge biblical
rascals had inflamed them. However the League plot succeeded to a point beyond
what the conspirators had originally intended as a first experiment. The Chartists
begin to see through the trick, the masters seize the passing opportunity of makiiig
a reduction in the wages of their impoverished workmen-all becomes confusion:
the masters,.many of whom are magistrates, become alarmed at their own monster,
and forthwith, the League and their fanatics skulk off and declare the wholeto be a
Chartist conspiracy, employing coercion to cause a cessation from labour, in order
to compel her Majesty to change her measures. Was ever concoction more hellish,
or design more palpable, mean, and cowardly ? Did the charge of conspiracy against
the League rest here it might be considered weak, but when we couple this fact with
those which occurred simultaneously in the very heart of the manufacturing districts
it gives to the whole plot a most circumstantial importance. When, however, we
take a fair, a full, and an impartial retrospect, one panoramic view of that which
-now presents itself, as a whole, we need no such aid as single acts or individual declaration. And if it is rightly held that, in cases of murder, circumstantial testiInony when wove into one perfect web of evidence can be made so strong, conclusive,
and convincing, as to justify the taking of life, by what law, I would ask, were we
excluded from establishing our own innocence, by proving the guilt of others, thab
v-ery guilt being charged on us ? In medical jurisprudence nothing is more common
than to prove the innocence of the accused upon mere presumption, while in our
case the presumption was adopted by the highest legal authorities in both houses
of parliament, and by the almost unanimous opinion of all classes, as well as by
the Press of the country; and yet were we precluded, not only from setting it up as
part of our defence, but furthermore from making it a ground for a mitigation of
punishment.

41-8
Having said so much by way of introduction, .I shall now proceed to the con.ideration of the whole question. Sir Robert Peel'stariff had the effect of dividing
the repealers into two distinct parties. Those of the commercial middle classes upon
the one, hand, who saw more than compensation for the income tax in the reduced
prices of all consumable and wearable Aticles; and those to whom such reduction
is insignificant as compared with' their gigantic notions of profits, derived from
an extended trade, improved machinery to meet it, and reduced wages to work it.
This latter class was further divided into sections - men who had full stocks and
heavy balances against them, to whom general confusion would have been a
welcome change, and those whose accounts very much depended upon the prospects
of the former section. That is, the two sections of manufacturers wef very much
in the situation of debtor and :creditor; the security of the one materially depending
-upon the stability of the other. Thus were good and bad forced by artificial
circumstances into the same boat; while the small manufacturers, ruined as if by
magic, saw nothing but beggary staring them in the face, to whom the reduced
price of consumable articles was as nothing, and who were ready for any change,
no matter how brought about, that held out a prospect of opening a market, so
long as they could hope to have a share in it. From this division in the ranks of the
free traders, we can fairly trace the increased excitement and altered tone of the
League. They were compelled to make up in threats and big words what they
had lost in numerical strength; and I.have not the least hesitation in saying, that,
had it not been for the tariff, the League could and would have forced Sir Robert
Peel to concede a total repeal of the Corn-laws, or would have compelled him to
abandon office and leave the work to Lord Palmerston and his friends, with
Lord Melbourne at their head, who, notwithstanding many former declarations,
would have braved all and every thing for the restoration to his snuggery and "easy
chair " at the palace. After this division we hear of the League-fund, of committees
of public safety, of assassinations, of risings and riotings throughout thp country,
,of stoppage of mills, and so forth, while we find the workifig class unanimous,
or nearly so, in resisting the means used by the League for the achievement of
their darling object. That I, at least, foresaw the immediate effect which the tariff
would have upon the League, is placed beyond contradiction. In addition to my
opinions published immediately at the time, my recorded speeches bear irrefutable
proof of the fact. I traversed north and south Lancashire, Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, and other great manufacturing counties, announcing to hundreds of
thousands of working mien the fact that the League had determined upon a revolntion to repeal the Corn-laws, and imploring the people to fold their arms and not
to be led by any excitement into a single violation of the law; I pointed out the
manner in which the revolution was to be commenced, and so far succeeded in
fdeveloping the plot of the League, that, as early as the month of June, I was
denounced upon the hustings at Bingley as a Tory spy, paid to keep the working
people quiet. It will be in the recollection of thousands who attended that meeting,
that I answered, " Why pay me for such honorable service, which f am ready to
*pendmy own money in performing." When Mr. Acland informed me, at Halifax,
that we should have the Charter oi a repeal of the Corn-laws in three weeks, and
that the means by which the change was to be effected was to be a simultaneous
turn-out of all the hands, I announced the project to the world, and I, in con-

ir9
junction with other Chartist leaders, came to the resolution of cautioning the people
against the snare that had been laid for them, Before I enter upon the general
question of the mode of excitement resorted to by the League, and the hope of
impunity which the authorities in the large mantifacuring towns held out to their
most violent partisans and lecturers, I shall comment firstly upon that portion of the
sworn evidence at Lancaster which confirms the charge that the League intended to
produce a general revolution, and I shall then explain how the Manchester conspirators checked its progress.
In handling a mighty subject of this kind, it is not sufficient to say "Read
the Quarterly Review containing an account of the doings of the League:" it
is not enough that the reasoning mind is irresistibly led to a conclusion, upon
mere circumstantial evidence, that they were the originators of the outbreak.
No; it is more satisfactory to lay before the reader real facts as bearing immediately
upon the case. This is my position. I contend that in July the League decided
upon a turn-out of the hands to effect a repeal of the Corn-laws, that the authorities,
being many of them manufacturers, not only tolerated violence as a means of
matring the project, but that, so long as it continued to be an agitation for the
repeal of the Corn-laws, they aided, comforted and abetted in the conspiracy,
and that go means were used, no arrests made, or caution given by the Law
authorities, until the people on strike resolved upon turning the agitation to the
attainment of the Charter. That they not only tamely looked on but openly
encouraged the most flagrant acts of violence that were committed throughout
the disturbances, and that it was not till after their expectations of making it an
agitation for their own measure had failed that they used those powers at their disposal for the suppression of. violence, and that then the parties hired by them, and
known to them to have been the most guilty, were unmolested, and, up to this moment
have escaped punishment or censure.
I shall proceed then to my proof from the sworn evidence of some of the witnesses produced upon the trial at Lancaster. Rhodes, the son-in-law of Shipley,
swore that on the 9th of August, their hands, that is the hands of Rhodes and
Shipley, to the number of 200, were turned out by about' 150 of those on strike.
This act was committed four days after Bailey had turned his hands out, and while
others were under notice of a redubtion, and when the League were in full expectan11
o,
.
1i. g the ranks of the revolutionists.
Between the 9th and the
15th, many meetings of turn-outs were held, and were addressed by manufacturers
and their agents, all of which are tolerated by the authorities; on the 15th of August,
an important meeting of trades' delegates, numbering over 300, declares for the
Charter; on.4he 16th, the same body is dispersed at the point of the bayonet,
having published an address as bold and manly as that of the Executive. And
then the hope of turning the agitation to repeal purposes having vanished, the authorities set to work to screen themselves from the charge of neglect of duty, by
a vigorous exercise of power in a wrong direction. Between the 9th and the 20th,
all the acts of outrage that did occur took place, and, as sworn to by every one of
the witnesses, the hands, after the 20th, began to return to their work. That is,
the masters again opened their mills, when the Chartists had succeeded in routing
them from their position. On the 26tb; after all hope had fled from their mind,
Rhodes and Shipley's men returned to work, and were attacked by six hundred of

420

the turn-outs at noon, and whom they succeeded in resisting and beating off
'They were again attacked in the evening with an increased force, amounting to
about one thousand, as sworn to by Rhodes and Shipley, and that force also the
Shipley, a
hands, about one hundred and fifty in number, resisted and beat off
decrepit old sinner, boasting that he had shot one or two with arms that he had
for the purpose of defending his works, when the League plot had failed. Now,
,can stronger:evidence be adduced iri proof of the fact that the turn out of the hands
in the" beginning of August was a conspiracy, with the intent of compelling the
Queeni to change her measures , But the case does not rest here; we have the evidence of Sir Thomas Potter, an active magistrate and a zeloius repealer, informing
us that"some parties-who, dbtibtless, were not in the conspiracy-applied for protection, or the means of defending their hands, and that the advice given to such
applicants by the authorities was, not to resist; and observe, this advice was given
before the Chartists interfered. But, as I mean to carry the fire into the enemy's
camp, and to charge the government with a perfect knowledge of all that has transpired, I here insert Sir Tlibmas Potter's cross-examination by the AttorneGeneral at' length.
"You are one of the magistrates ?:Yes, a borough magistrate as well as a county
magistrate. I think we have already got it that the magistrates issued a proclamation ? Yes. A sort of joint proclamation ? Yes, we issued a proclamation in conjunction. What number of special constables were sworn in in Manchester ? I
don't just recollect. You can give me some notion of the number-how many
scores or hundreds ? At what period do you mean ? At any time after the 7th
or 8th of August, down to the 16th or 17th ? I don't know that I can speak with
any degree of certainty, but I should think about 500. Do you know how many
troops were in Manchester ? We bad, during the first week, about 500; but a deputation of the magistrates waited upon the Secretary for the Home Department, and
we had a considerable reinforcement. How many ? I cannot say. When did you
apply for more The deputation went off on the Saturday. What Saturday?
"he JUDGE:-The 13th ? Witness;-No, my Lord-I think it was Saturday
-wait-Tuesday was the 9th. Yes, I think it was Saturday the 13th.
" The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-How many more did you get ? I really cannot tell, exactly; we had a detachment of the guards, and some cavalry; perhaps
about 1500, but I cannot speak with accuracy. I want no particular accuracy.
Was it beyond 1500 altogether ? I think so. Did you yourself personally attend
as a magistrate at the Town Hall ? Oh yes. Are you able to tell me whether the
magistrates attended day and night ? Yes; I can tell you that they attended day
and night. For how long ? Oh, I think it was three or four weeks. Two or three
magistrates were lodged at the adjacent hotel-indeed, next door-in readiness to be
called up at any hour. How many weeks ? I think it would be full four weeks.
Where was the comnmander-in-chief of the district at the time ? He was at the York
Hotel, close by the Town Hall. Were the magistrates in attendancef Yes. Did
the special constables attend at the Town Hall ? Yes. Day and night ? I don't
know whether they were all night, though I think they were. Was there not a relay of them relieving each other, so that there should be a party in constant attendance day and night ? I believe there was. For how long ? For at least a month.
Did you see anything of what occurred in Manchester on Tuesday the 9th, and
Wednesday the 10th of August ? On Tuesday the 9th, I was at my warehouse the
whole of the day, but I heard of these things-I don't want to know, Sir Thomas,
what you heard, I want to kuow whether you saw anything of the state of Manchester, the public streets, the shops, and warehouses, during those two days ? I saw nothing particular on the 9th. On Wednesday there seemed to be a great deal of excitement. Were not all the shops shut ? I don't think many of the shops were shut

421
on the Wednesday. Then were'they on the Tuesday or the Thursday ? No, certainly not on the Tuesday.
" The JUDGE :-I thought you said you were in the warehouse all the Tuesday ? SoI was, my lord.
"The JUDGE :--Then vyol don't know ?' Witness:-I believe the shos 'were
not shut up, but I don't know of my own knowledge.e
" The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-I want to know whether you Werepresent
at any of the violence, or at the stoppage of any of the mills? No, I was not; I
was the oldest magistrate, : and they kept me principally at the Town, Hall, with the
exception that I once went at the head of the troops to the railroad. Wh1t1 as that
A troop of
for,? We heard that they were attempting to destroy the ,ailroad.
cavalry was called out, and I went with them; but another magisrate soon°ciime
and relieved me. I suppose you went for the purpose of atthisin theirig of
the trobps, if necessary ? Yes. What time did that happen ? I don't knowq-,butI
think it must have beei a week after. Do you remember the dayQf the ekl? I
don't, It could not be Tuesday' the 9th, or Wdnsday? Oh, n; it s nt that
week, but the following. And did you go with the troops ? Yes. Iow maiy?
There was a troop of horse, about forty I suppose. And have you no rec61lection,
Sir Thomas Don't understand me, that, in putting the question, I have any other
feeling than the greatest respect; you cannot imagine that I have any other
feeling? Oh certainly not. But you cannot tell what day you went with the forty
troopers to protect the railway ? I really cannot; it was some time the following
week. Who had the command ofithe troops in'Manchester? Do you mean when
the reipnforcements came ? Yes. Sir Thomas Arbuthnot and' Sir William Warre.
Now, 1 want to know, whether you were present at any meeting of the magistrates
when any persons came to demand or to request assistance ? Yes; I believe I was.
Were you present at any time when :the magistrates advised them to stop their
works for the present, and not to make any resistance, or anything of that sort. Yes;
I think there was a general advice of that sort given. There was a general advice
given not to resist Yes. Why was that advice given, sir P
"'Mir. O'CONNOR:-I have- no objection, my Lord, to the fullest developement
of the case ; but is this evidence ?
" The ATTORNEY-GENERAL -,Then I will ask it. I will put it plump to
him. Was not the state of the town such that you did not dare to advise theparties
to resist.?--Were you not afraid of bloodshed and tumult ? Witnessi-,idividually,
I was never afraid. I don't impute to you personal fear, sir; but I ask you,
whether the town was not in that state that the magistrates advised them to yield to
the imob, in orderto prevent tumult and confusion? Why, the fact is, they had no
difficulty; for theparties seemed quite ready to be turned out, or to turn-out.
There was no force necessary, that is very well known. Come, Sir Thomas that is
no answer to my question.
Mr. O'CONNOR:-1I dare say it is not the one you wanted.
"The ATTORNEYGENERAL :-You were telling me you were present'when
the people came for assistance, and they were advised not to resist. I ask you, why
was that advice given ? I cannot say why. I recollect a young man came asking
advice whether he should fire upon the mob. He said he had cannon, and could
destroy so many; and I know we advised him to do no such thing. Did no-t you,
or the magistrates, recommend the persons not to resist the attempts of the mob ?
I don't remember any particular recommendation; but I know it was our opinion
that it was better not to resist. And was it not to prevent bloodshed ? I think not.
I don't think that the magistrates were at all under the influence of fear. Then will
you tell me, why you recommended them not to resist ? I believe, in some cases, as
at Mr. Birley's mill, they did resist effectually. Was that any reason why you
should recommend them not to resist? I don't know whether we did recommend them
not to resist. Why, sir, I ask you whether, at every mill that effectually resisted,
was not the advice by the magistrates to give up resistance ? Not in my hearing;
certainly not. Do you remember Messrs. Stirling and Beckton making an appli-

422,
catioden P I was not present when they made any, though I believe they did make
one.
e"
Mr. O'CONNOR:--That will do, Sir Thomas."
I now select the following question, put by the Attorney-General in his crossexamination, as direct proof that the Government were in possession of the whole
facts of the case. He asks, " Now, I want to know, whether you were present at
any meeting of the magistrates when any persons came to demand or to request
assistance? " Answer-" YEs, I BELIEVE I WAS."
"Were you present at any
time when the magistrates advised them to stop their work for the present and not
to make any resistance, or something of that sort? " Answer-" YES, I THINK
"There was a general
THERE WAS A GENERAL ADVICE OF THAT SORT GIVEN."
advice given not to resist ? " " YES." Subsequently, it will be seen, that, when
the Attorney-General " plumped it to him," Sir Thomas Potter says, he was not
called upon, and that the fact was, there was no disposition to resist. Now, will
any sane man, in this civilized country, contend for one moment that even-handed
justice has been dealt out. When we find the first law officer of the Crown conducting a prosecution against working men, and resisting the production of evidence
which would unquestionably have satisfied the jury as to who the real offenders
were; and then, when driven to it, compelled, in his cross-examination of a
magistrate, to admit that he was in possession of facts which led to the outbreak,
but dare not censure the wrong doers ?
I now come to a consideration of the part taken by the conspirators in this alarming outbreak. Either the doctrine must be set up that, as a political party, we, the
Chartists, had no right to interfere, or every good man upon reflection must admit,
that our interference at the moment, had the most wholesome, salutary, and healing
effect. It is a fact which none will deny, that the longer a strike continues, the
more likely it is to acquire an augmentation to its numbers, and thereby become
more dangerous and appalling, while it is proved, beyond a possibility of doubt, that
those who looked to such a frightful state of things for the accomplishmentof their object
had the power to augment or diminish the number of the turn-outs, and that they did
augment their numbers from the 5th of August to that period when they discovered that
the force created for one purpose would be used for another, and to which they had no
inclining. That no remonstrance was conveyed to the Hunt's monument committee, that no proclamation was issued, that no arrests were made, that no disapprobation was expressed, that no precaution was used, while the machinery for revolution
was being organised; but that the moment the tide of tongues turned the public
mind to another object, then we hear of hasty communications between the Hunt's
committee and the magistrates, then we hear of royal proclamations and proclamations from the authorities; then we hear of that vigorous exercise of power, which, if
merely threatened in the outset, would have arrested the evil on its first appearance.
If, on the other hand, as the wisest of the judges of the land -have declared, we have a
right to advocate Chartism, let us now see whether or not the conspirators made a discreet use of that right. Suppose the delegates had met and had separated without taking
notice or advantage of passing events, what, I would ask, in such case would have been
the value of the right conceded by the judges, and then comes the question as to the
use we did make of the occasion. We had an open meeting. A deserter from our
ranks admitted as a reporter for any portion of the press he chose to communicate

423
with. Strangers and youths are admitted to our deliberations. We publish every act
done in conference. Upon the appearance of the following number of the Northern
Star, published on the 20th, the masters, deprived of their forces, open their mills, and
invite their hands to return to work for the first time since the turn -out. No further
violation of law or act of outrage takes place. The disappointed masters instantly
put the law in full force against all but the instigators in order to screen the really
guilty parties; a government agent is sen't down to enquire into the whole affair; he
very naturally goes to the guilty authorities, overt acts are the things to which his attention is directed; these are said to have been committed by the hands who are all
Chartists, and thus is the name of Chartist outbreak given to the most foul and damnable conspiracy that ever was hatched against the Chartist cause. Had the delegates passed a resolution recommending the hands to remain out until the Cornlaws were repealed, no power at the disposal of government, no power, save that of
the Almighty ruler of events, could have averted a bloody revolution; the end of
which would have been weeping and wailing upon the part of the confiding people,
and the establishment of a capitalist-malthusian dynasty, more cruel, bloody, and
tyrannical than the worst species of military despotism, under which no slave's condition would be one half as good as that of a common soldier. To prevent that state
of things I was a willing conspirator; and, should the dread necessity arise again, I
will again conspire for a like purpose.
What, then, was the result of Chartist interference, and what was the question
debated by the delegates, and what was the cause assigned for the part they took ?
The result of their interference was to paralyze the hand of faction, to force open
the factory door that bad been closed against those to whose fury the capitalists looked as a means of terrifying government and all opposed to their darling
measure, relied upon by some as a means of increasing their already over abundant
and unjustly acquired wealth, and by others, whose outward and visible signs bespoke solidity and security, but whose bankers' books and liabilities betokened approaching ruin, which could only be arrested by a crash in which all would be levelled,
as a means of hiding that condition to which gambling in human existence, assisted
by fraudulent loans of confiding shareholders' money, had brought them. When
those appliances were wrenched from their hands, fury, indignation, and disappointment succeed sanguine hope and promised gain, and those worst of all malignities
are directed with double purpose against the saviours of their country; firstly, as
a means of revenge, and secondly, in the hope of screening the really guilty, by
accusing the really inhocent. It is a remarkable fact, that failure after failure of the
most prominent revolutionists followed the declaration of the people to abandon the
League project; and is it wonderful then, that the penalty for frustrating such an
unholy mode of balancing accounts should have been imprisonment, torture, transportation, or even death. The very moment that the concoctors of rebellion discovered
the Weakness of their physical forces, they turned to the moral protection of the law.
As magistrates they appear to have awakened from a long slumber; as masters they
appear to have learned the impossibility of keeping the torrent, which they themselves had created, within the prescribed bounds, which in their weakness they
had assigned to it; as men they see the flood of opinion rising to overwhelm them,
they then open the flood gates which they had closed against the tide, the waters gradually subside, the elements of discord pass away, society is restored to its former

424
calm, but their disappointment must have'its sacrifice, and the League, fearful of the
ailure of their own project proving the weakness of their force, and in the hopeof
shewing the imbecility of the Chartists, thunder forth their anathemas against the
iverv men who flew to the rescue' and invoke, first, military aid to repress, and
then legal persecution to punish them.
Such were the immediate results of Chartist interference. Next, what was the
question debated by the delegates. This could have been proved from the notes of
-Griffin, the only reporter who took a full report of the proceedings, had the AttorneyGeneral examined him to the contents of those notes, but he dare not; and then, in
his reply, stoically turns upon me and asks, why I did not examine him to those
-notes; as well might he have said, " There, is the indictment upon which I charge
you all with the several offences set forth, there is a list of the witnesses for the prosecution, examine them, if you please, to prove your innocence, or else the jury must
presume your guilt." Every advocate for the defendants very properly abstained
from a course which, from such a witness, might have extracted a fresh lie. And
was it our business to make out the prosecutor's case ? But the fair presumption is,
that, had these notes made against the defendants, they would have been read at
length, as there appeared no impatience on the part of the Crown to hear the pot
hooks and hangers of hired and illiterate spies, spelt, read, and translated when a
single word prejudicial to ia single defendant could be extracted. But here I shall
take the opportunity of proving, from the very omission, thb fact that the whole
prosecution was a conspiracy, of which the Attorney-General must have been
cognizant, and that the indictment was purposely framed with a desire of implicating
the innocent by the acts of those against whom something in the shape of evidence
amight be extorted. Why, then, were not Griffin's notes read at full length ? For
this simple reason,-because the Attorney-General knew that those notes would have
insured my acquittal. Why, then, did I not examine to those notes ? Because I was
in the' same boat, with a crew with whom I had embarked on an honorable expedition, and I would sacrifice life itself before I would inculpate the meanest to
exculpate myself. Suppose I had examined Griffin to those notes, how did I know
what he might have added to the prejudice of some of the defendants, and what
would have been my feelings had I succeeded in accomplishing that which the
Attorney-General failed to effect, namely, to prove the guilt of any by the examination in chief of the "traitor" Griffin-aye " TRAITOR "-the Just Judge gave him
the name, and his performances stood sponsors. But had these notes been indeed
a fair report of the proceedings, and had I desired to establish my own innocence
at the hazard of impugning others, what, I ask, could I have proved ? Why, that
I not only discountenanced, but censured every strong expression used in debate;
and that, when the traitor Cartledge proposed the arrest of the magistrates and
masters as hostages, and recourse to violence, I not only rebuked him, but,
as every delegate will remember, I told him that I doubted the prudenye of
admitting such men to our deliberations. It is natural then to conclude, that
this nould have appeared upon the notes of his brother traitor and would
not have much served the character of Cartledge with the jury.-What then,
,in the absence of those notes, was the question discussed by the delegates ?
It was this:-How revolution might be averted, and how, at the same time, events
might be fairly turned to the advantage of Chartism-and after long and calm dis-

eussion, it was decided that the League had fomented the outbreak, not more from
desire to repeal the Corn-laws, than to get rid of their hands, rendered unremunerating until the surplus produce should be disposed of, and with the further intention
of embarking the Chartists in an undertalyng from the failure of which they
calculated the annihilation of our cause, and to the success of which they looked for
the ascendancy of their party, and the accomplishment of their object. In short,
Such was the
with them the odds were, "heads we win, harps you lose."
character of the debate, and now I am to disclose the reasons assigned for the part
they took in the affair.
Of course the very election of the delegates is prima facie proof of their knowledge of those political events then passing. They, many of them,indeed a large
majority, came from the very districts then disturbed, and one and all appeared to
be fully impressed with a belief, that, if not stopped, hunger, destitution, insult and
deprivation of every kind would drive the people to madness and despair, and the
more certainly if deserted by old and tried leaders, in whom ther had every reason
to place the most unbounded confidence. It was with this view that the only
resolution passed was drawn up; it was with this view that the address of the delegates published in the Northern Star of the 20th was adopted. These documents
had the salutary effect of proving to the Chartist community, that, in the hour of
danger, their friends were at hand, and that, in the midst of chaos, they still adhered
to their own principles as the best and only means of restoring society to that state
in which the power of the disturber would be weak and pointless-such then
was the result of our interference-such was the character of our debate, and such
were the reasons for our interference, and, if the end did not justify the means, I am
no judge of what is right or what is wrong. But as our cause has survived the
shock of the power of united factions, and yet flourishes amid their approaching ruin,
public opinion will justify what malice has persecuted, and will teach to the world
the moral lesson that bayonets and edicts contending against thought and opinion,
are engaged in hopeless warfare, for even the man who falls a victim to the point of
the one, or the tyranny of the other, leaves a spirit behind, which binds the living
in a faster union-more than compensating for a single loss.
Let us now turn our attention to the several matters contained in the affidavitlet s also bear in mind the several phases, which, according to circumstances the
turrdits assumed-let us carry in our own minds the conduct of
all parties as a
whole, and from those sources I undertake to prove to every sane man, that the
revolution was intended, and that the Chartists resi'sted it-that the government knew
that it was intended, but was afraid to use means for its suppression until that division
brought about by the conference delegates had disunited the parties supposed by the
government to have been associated for one common object; the rich oppressor
upon one side, and the poor oppressed upon the other.
We have learned the character of those speeches made in the League Conferences,
held in London and at Manchester; we have seen the prelictions of prophets, with
power to fulfil their own forebodings, verified; we have seen the exact machinery
upon which they relied brought into perfect operation at the required moment, and
remaining in active operation for the predicted time; and now let us ask, with
such facts before us, coupled with others to which I shall briefly refer-was it possible that other results than those which unfortunately did spring from such a combiq

426
-iation of circumstances could have occurred. The circumstances then to which I
propose to direct your attention are these :-The most influential men of the League
after the failure of Mr.Villiers' motion in the House of Commons, ranged themselves
in open hostility to the law and the gA ernment-their speeches were published by the
whole press of the country-they were accompanied by comments the most exciting
and inflammatory, and were circulated gratuitously amongst the most distressed portion of the working classes. In those speeches the revolutionists pointed out the
mneans by which all authority might be successfully assailed, and, indeed, one reverend
gentleman (Mr. Spencer) in his zeal went so far as to recommend the introduction into
London of some thousands of starving operatives from the north of England, to play
the part of sturdy strange beggars, for the purpose of intimidating the monopolists.
If we then follow those men to their several localities after the conference had broken
;up, we find them, in their individual characters, at times labouring zealously in
their vocafioxns as conspirators, freely distributing those inflammatory and seditious notions (which had been concocted in conference) amongst the poor
and impoverished operatives. A mayor tells them, in his own locality, that if
they are hungry they have a right to steal, and that if they are shot in their
theft, the act is murder. A member of parliament tells them that they have
suffered too long, and that a few weeks will try the mettle of his countrymen. A Scotch provost informs them that if risings and riotings take place
be, as a Christian magistrate, would not feel himself justified in using the force at his
disposal for their suppression-a man of eminence amongst them tells them that
fisings and riotings must take place-while their most popular, and by far their
mrst powerful organ, " the Sun," announces the declaration as one which will be
reeeived throughout the country with joy, and will be responded to with cheersthe three bloody days in Paris, which destroyed monarchy and established a despotism in that country, are pointed to as worthy of imitation-the weakness of
government, if simultaneously assailed by masters and men, is industriously
fire of popular wrath
pointed out. The whole body of landlords against whom the
marked for vengeance-they are designated as murderers, plunis to be directed, are
Serers, and tyrants-their accumulated property is represented as a nuisance and spoil
it would be no crimestolen from the nation-and that to burn or otherwise destroy
of the Prime Minister, who is supposed to be the organ of the onoiim qassination
for lettiAg oose,
olists, is a thing familiarly spoken of and applauded-the necessity
they may march, not in peace, but in
the whole of the labouring population so that
of their own order visiting those
battle, is trumpeted forth. The hope of juries
the actors-their agents throughout the counatrocities with impunity is held out to
note of preparation; and, not
try are tuned to the same key and sound the same
and the publication of those in
satisfied with the most inflammatory declarations,
for the purpose of giving circulafull, we find a printing press at their service used
with a view of impressing
tion to the most seditious portions of their harangues,
desperate by
Item more forcibly upon the inflamed minds of paupers rendered
Will any man in his senses say that the government was unaware of those cirmust inevitably lead ? or will
cumstances, or ignorant of the results to which they
the conspiracy were ignorant of the impression which
any man say that the actors in
such publications must make upon the minds of starving men ? Why then, it may

427
be asked, did not the government put a stop to those transactions in the outset ? or
why, if the strong arm of the law became necessay for their suppression, was it not
directed against the real offenders ? or why are the innocent still hunted and persecuted after the declaration made by Mr. Justice Patteson, and acquiesced in by the
Lord Chief Justice of England, " that the language used by the League was highly
seditious and punishable by the law ?" With what colour of justice can the first law
officer of the crown still persevere in his crusade against honest, innocent working
men after his declaration that the language used by the League was seditious and
illegal, while those parties remain unpunished? What is the sophistry of the
Attorney-General ? "Oh," says he, " but those parties are not before the Court."
To this I answer,-" But if any should be, they are the parties who ought to be
before the Court."
The next question which arises is, why are they not there, and whose duty was
to bring them there ? They are not there because the Attorney-General is afraid to
bring them there, he has failed in the performance of that duty, and, however he
may have succeeded in getting a nominal verdict of guilty against some poor
working men for acts of which he knew others had been guilty, yet, thank God,.
there is a tribunal too large to be PACKED-and too pure to be purchasedto whom the persecuted may yet appeal, and that appeal will be responded
to by 6oth rich and poor, when the whole case shall be laid before them denuded of legal ingenuity and stript of political craft. But beyond such considerations I have proof, irrefutable proof of the fact, that when Mr. Gregory
went down to Manchester, as agent for the Crown, le there learned the whole facts
of the case; and further, that he went there with an impression that I had been the
author of what is called the Executive Placard, and that, after several days of searching inquiry, he acknowledged to more than one person that he had discovered his error
upon that as well as many other points; and, nevertheless, he either withheld
those facts from the knowledge of the prosecutors, or, if he communicated them, the
Government is guilty of persevering in a prosecution for which they were aware
there was not the slightest foundation. This crusade, however, against Chartism,
has now terminated, after an expenditure of between 20,0001. and 30,0001., and will
the country be satisfied that it has had that amount in justice: and in what position
does this strong Government now find itself-beaten in law by a handful of poor
working men, and despised by all for its truckling weakness to a party of whose
guilt it was cognizant, but whose power it dreaded. If the evil even stopped
here it would not be so great, but we must look to the after results likely to
arise from this persecution of the innocent and im'punity to the guilty. Every
man must be aware that however immediate failure may cause a temporary
despondency amongst free traders, that that body is too powerful to be
driven from its purpose, and that it will naturally look to the impunity of the past
as an inducement to try the same means once more for effecting their purpose.
What is the fair presumption now ? Why, naturally, that at any given moment
society may be disturbed by a similar course of action; the hands may be again
turned out when stocks are heavy, and the same results which followed the last
experiment, would flow from one of a similar kind; while the hope of the Conspirators may be strengthened by past impunity. They have only to create the disturbance, and the people, being Chartists, will be necessarily compelled to take part

428
in them, when, should a second failure take place,. the vengeance of the law will be
again directed against the offended, while the offenders will, as before, escape with
impunity; and yet we are told that there is not one law for the rich.and another
law for the poor-nor in truth is there--for there is strong law for the poor, and no
law but caprice for the rich. There is one feature in this case which fully illustrates
the fact, it is the case of Mr. Conspirator Southam, and to which I shAdl here refer;
and, fortunately for me, this case is taken out of the mild sophistry of the AttorneyGeneral, for here we had a wealthy master and a Leaguer within the trammels of
the law; and let us see what has become of him ? He is the very man who
proposed the invasion of Manchester.
Now then, I ask, was any sentiment as strong as that uttered by any one of the
tried conspirators ?-Was any language of theirs equally calculated to produce riot,
tumult and even revolution ? Here is a volunteer leader ready to place himself at
the head of an excited and exasperated people to lead them to Manchester, provided
that their object was a repeal of the Corn-laws. What, I ask, has become of this
Quixotic demagogue -Has he been torn from his family-has he been consigned
to the tender mercies of the jailor-is his lot a felon's cell-is he branded as a
coUspirator-and upon his apprehension, and after the strongest evidence had been
adduced against him, was he remanded, and re-remanded to a filthy cell, until the.
street-sweepers of Manchester could procure evidence against him-or was he
obliged to find bail in £2000 amount for his appearance ? No, no; nd such thing,
he was bound in some £200 bail; his case was quickly disposed of; he is at home
with his family, and ready at the word of command once more to lead his starving
slaves in their attack upon the lives or property of others, provided his own, and
those of his order, stand in no danger; and then we are to be told that there is not
one law for the rich and another law for the poor !
Having thus very briefly shown that the conduct of the League was sure to lead
to some terrible result, that they anticipated that result, that the government were
in full possession of every word spoken, and of every act done, by that body, and
that the government either did learn, or should have learned, from their professional
plenipotentiary, that I and my friends were wholly innocent of the offences laid to
our charge-I shall now carry the fire into the enemies' camp, and convict the
government upon proof so complete and clear, that nothing but disregard of poyular opinion and reliance upon physical force can save them from the consequences of their inattention, their carelessness, their cowardice, and their injustice.
That the outbreak was a gre4t national calamity no'man will deny; that its character was not at all heightened by the public journals is a fact that I am ready to
admit; and that a solemn enquiry into the origin, the progress and causes of such
an event should be laid before a competent tribunal, none but the really guilty will
deny. Whether O'Connor said, " Take advantage of passing events to push our
cause,"-or whether Cartledge brought a placard to M'Douall to be printed, and
corrected if necessary-Whether James Leach had a copy of that placard, like all
other newsvendors, at his door, and whether the bill poster who stuck it there left
another in his shop while he was absent-Whether Doyle was with a party of turnouts while those a half-mile behind him did some damage to the locks of the
canal-Whether Mooney, having said that the Chartists were prepared to carry
the Charter by physical force, having a double barrelled gun and three single

429
ones-Whether Arthur sat in Scholefield's chapel without once opening his lipseWhether Brooke wrote short notes of what really did occur at that meeting--Wher
ther Pilling sai " I'll drub," or " I'll drum the Oldham boys to-morrow "Whether he said I-oole or Dick, o. Fool or Dick-Whether Jamieson's men were
making a black jacket or a brown jacket when the committee of public safety interfered and gave a decree in favour of the mourning-Whether those who were shot
at Preston were hit in the- front or back-Whether Griffin was induced by bribes
and the hope of exposing me, and Cartledge by hope of 'saving himself-Whether
Scholefield, in going through his chapel to his back premises went for his raven or his
jackdaw--Whether such transactions should have been inquired into some way or
other is not the question. What I contend is, that a great national investigation
should not have been put upon so paltry, slender, and complicated an issue, and
that, as the Courts will not allow the right of property to be tried by an action for
assault, neither should the crown have allowed a great national question to have
been decided by the persecution of a few plinor. actors in the great drama-wher
all the appliances of persecution were on the one side, and all the adverse circum"
stances upon the other. What then was the clue that government had to the trans,
action, beyond what the published evidence furnished.
SBesides the compilation of the most striking facts laid before them in their mos
powerful and favoured organ, The Quarterly Review, and which remain uncontra-.
dicted to this moment, they had the opinion of Lord Brougham that the establish*
ment of the truth or falsehood of those allegations should constitute a portion of the
duty of the Crown at Lancaster. They had the implied admission of the Secretary
of State for the Home Department to the same effect, when, in his place in parlia-.
ment, he said, that at the approaching trials at Lancaster, the whole case would be'
gone into. They further had the congratulations of Lord Stanhope very laudably
expressed in his place in the House of Lords, as to the temper and forbearance exhibited by the working classes while on strike. They had the declaration of Lord
Francis Egerton in his place inparliament, that the League were chargod with being
the originators of the outbreak. 4'hey had the declaration of Mr. Fielden in his
place, that the " Poor-law Amendment Bill" was the cause of the revolution. They
had the declaration of Mr. Ferrand in his place, that machinery was the cause, andi
they had the declaration of Mr. Cobden, that the conservative landlords of Lanca.
shire were the cause; add to which, the disagreement existing between the leading
journals as to who the guilty parties were; the anti-monopolist journals charging it
upon the landlords, while the rhonopolist prints laid it at the door of the employers;.
but until I was arrested, not a tongue charged the Chartists with the offence, although
every act done by our party was published Without reserve in the Northern Siar
newspaper, and although the executive placard had been published in every paper
in the kingdom, with the exception of the Northern Star, and although the States".
man and the Weekly Chronicle bestowed much labour of love in endeavouring to,
prove, not only that I approved of that document, but that I actually drew it up with
my own hand: and to those two liberal prints we are pre-eminently indebted for the
measure of persecution we have suffered. Here, says the Attorney-General to Gregory, here we have the fact admitted ini a Chartist paper; but Gregory learned . a
Manchester that it was false. But even beyond these innumerable charges, wI~t
further proof have we of the fact that 'the government was .cognizant of the whole

430
transaction, and merely resorted to the persecution ot the Chartist leaders to cover
their own disgrace ? If all the facts that I have stated are not sufficient to saddle the
charge of cowardice upon the government, that which I am now about to add will
prove, not only that they knew who the real offenders were, bughat they actually
threw the shield of their protection over them.
I have before stated that there existed a strong desire upon the part of all classes,
with the ekeception of the government and the League, that a full, fair, and searching
enquiry should be had into those causes which had all but led to civil war. And
now let us see who resisted all appeals for such an enquiry. Night after night, at
the commencement of the session, government was taunted with having created poverty by their acts of commission and omission, and that the increasing poverty led
to increased insecurity. They resisted all application for enquiry, which would be
likely to bring the state of the people fairly before the country, but furthermore they
actually resisted a motion for an enquiry into the origin of those very outbreaks, for
creating which we were persecuted. I would ask any sane man then; any man loving peace and order and justice, whether the mock trial at Lancaster, or a full enquiry before a committee of the House of Commons, would have been the best mode
of arriving at the truth, and whether such course would not have been more creditable to ministers and more satisfactory to the nation at large; and does not the refusal of government to sanction such inquiry at once and for ever establish the belief
that they had a perfect knowledge of all that was likely to transpire before that committee, and that they resisted it lest they should be brought in contact with the beastly
League, who would find favour in the sight of juries of their own order and kidney.
The Chartists prayed hard and incessantly for such enquiry. I used my every exertion to procure it, but all to no purpose; the fears of the landlords must be alarmed
by a Chartist " scare-crow," and the guilt of the League must be screened from dread
of their power.
Let us now consider, what evidence would have been presented to that committee
had it been granted, in addition to those notorious facts which I have already stated,
and which, of themselves, were more than ample not only to justify, but to demand,
enquiry the most open, full, and searching. We weld have proved that theLeague,
in conjunction with some shopkeepers, hired delegates to traverse north Lancashire,
for the purpose of inflaming the people's minds, and to prepare them for a turn-out
to carry a repeal of the Corn-laws; that they were furnished with the most inflammatory, sanguinary, and bloody placards; that they called at the house of the
conspirator Leach, and that Leach most vehemently implored them to abandon their
design. That the League and the shopkeepers entered into a subscription to support
the )urn-outs as long as they remained out for a repeal of the Corn-laws. That the
Attorney-General had one of those placards placed in his hands, and that he
knows it was beyond comparison more violent than the Executive Placard. That
the League gave instructions to those itinerating firebrands, as to the mode of
insuring a repeal of the Corn-laws by a turn-out, which must lead to physical
aggression. These things would have been proved by thousands. What further
evidence could I have brought to bear upon the general question ? This-that early
in June I learned the intentions of the League, that those intentions were to have
been carried out firstly in North Lancashire5 coward-like away from their own works,
and where the poor hand-loom weavers of Burnley, of Colne, of Padiham, of

431
Accrington, Preston, and other towns, would have furnished willing soldiers for the
experimental war. That I cautioned the operatives of North and South Lancashire
against the project, that I apprised them of the design, and told them that we did
not stand so much in danger from Tory spies (as the Tories did not want an outbreak) as we did from spies bought from our own ranks by the League for the
purpose of creating confusion: that letter remains (with the date) in print. That
about the end of June, or the beginning of July, I made a tour of north Lancashire,
at the risk of my life, to save my party from the snares that had been set for them.
That I discovered, while in that district, that a delegate meeting had been projected
by strangers, for the arpose of denouncing and throwing overboard our Executive
Committee, and of coming out some fine morning with Pot-sticks and clubs to fight
for the Charter. This I, in conjunction with a few others, discovered and put a
stop to; thus saving thousands from death and thousands from persecution. I
admit that some of our very best and most zealous friends were likely to be caught
in this trap; and this is the danger the bold and zealous are in, not the danger of
their own actions, but that arising from the intrigues of others; while we seldom
find that a single projector waits the firing of the train which he has laid. It was
so in this case. The "concoctors were to come from a distance, and to return to a
distance when others had undertaken their work, as in 1839, the valiant leader to
whom poor Holbery owes his death, when asked to remain to see the fulfilment of
his project, replied,-" 0, no, a good general should never put his person in
danger."-HE FLED, and poor Holbery died his victim.
When I returned to Manchester, after my tour in North Lancashire,I met M'Douall
and Leach, and spoke to them as follows:--" I.tell you what, we must look after
North Lancashire. What do you think-i had a free-trade resolution submitted to
me last night, which it was intended to propose to an immense meeting that I
addressed. When I read it, I instantly said, if any man dares to propose that I
will move the Charter as an amendment, and denounce him from the platform
whatever the consequence may be. It was then abandoned." I continued, "And now,
I tell you both, that spies are abroad, that poor Beesley has manfully resisted them,
with the assistance of some of our best friends; but they will be sacrificed if we
are not upon the alert, for the League conspiracy is gaining ground in North
Lancashire."' I recommended a delegate being instantly dispatched to North
Lancashire, and M'Douall said he would go himself, and he did go; and to the
truth of these assertions any man in North Lancashire can testify; and that I was
openly charged with being a Tory spy, paid to keep the people from fighting. But
if I had told the people to fight, or encouraged them to fight, I would have been at
their head. Now, not one single man engaged in that conspiracy has been prosecuted, although they are all well known to the auturities; while poor Mooney and
Tattersal have been selected as victims, because they were unbribable. Nay, more,
those rascals were able not only to deceive but actually had daring and impudence enough to charge the innocent with their own sins. But beyond all
this, I would have had Sir Charles Shaw examined before that committee, and I would
undertake to say that that officer would have irrefutably established this fact, that he
was hunted from Manchester, because he would not lend himself to the furtherance
of the League-plot. Why, I ask, has he, the most important of all the authorities,
never been examined up to this hour ? Wbvhy'was he not examined upon the trial

432
of the victims at Lancaster ? Because he would have proved that the authorities of
Manchester were one and ll in league with the free-traders, and that they concocted,
encouraged, and created the war. Why was not Maude, the stipetdiary magistrate,
examined, the very man who took the head of the invading procession, and who
directed their movements ? The mind sickens at the bare contemplation of such
acts of treachery, cowardice, and truckling of a strong government-which has
evinced, its strength in the weakness of its case, notwithstanding the all-grasping
comprehensiveness, and great legal perspicuity, evinced in its net-THE MONSTER
INDICTMENT.

Before I dismiss this part of my subject, I shall give a practical illustration, if not
of the fact that there is one law for the rich and another law for the poor, that
there is, however, one measure of justice for the political friend, and another measure
for the political foe.
Here let me observe, that I entirely agree with Mr. Justice Patteson, when he
remarked, that that court did not initiate proceedings, but merely pronounced judgment upon matters brought before it; and it is to those who have made wrong selections of those parties that I attribute the greatest evil of which society has reason to
complain. In proof of this fact, I could multiply instance upon instance, butI shall
content myself with the following illustration, -as it is analagous to the case of
Turner, who printed the executive placard. It will be in the recollection of all who
read newspapers, that in the spring of last year, I announced my intention of delivering an address in the Hall of Science in Manchester-that throughout the day,
upon the night of which that address was to be delivered, the walls of Manchester
were covered with bills inciting the people to attend in their thousands and murder
me-that one man, of the name of Price, accepted the offer of five pounds to knock
me off the platform, beneath which a chosen band of assassins were ranged, armed
with hatchets, pokers, bludgeons, stones, and other missiles-that the moment I presented myself, the attempt was made amid howlings the most tremendous to effect
this bloody purpose. The five pound assassiii made a rush at me behind, to ensure
the blood-money. I was fortunate enough, however, to be too powerful for him--I
knocked him off the platform, and, in less than five minutes, myself and about fifteen determined men, amid showers of missiles and shouts of execration, succeeded
in ejecting about seventy assassins from the platform-the whole furniture of the
building was cut to atoms with hatchets-stones and pokers were flying in all directions-the gas pipes were torn up-I was knocked down four timnes-and at last
carried off bleeding violently from the temple. Thirty-seven others were mangled
in a most shocking manner-ribs. arms, and heads were broken. The police, though
in the neighbourhood in large numbers, never attempted to interfere; and now for
my illustration. Upon the following morning I applied to Mr. Maude, the stipendiary magistrate then sitting upon the bench, to send a policeman, as the law warranted him, to the printer's for the manuscript of the murderous placard. I told hinm
I could trace it to the secretary of a Free Trade association, and that I could prove
that from 500 to 1000 ruffians had received drink, and from one shilling to two
shillings and sixpence a head, to assassinate me-but no-lhis officer of justice-the
stipendiary magistrate who headed the invading army into Manchester-who remanded and re-remanded Leach and others--who routedTurner's shop-and by whose
authority, I believe, Turner's types and printing machinery are still withheld from

433
hjm-this Corn-law repeal magistrate had the impudence to tell me to my face,
that he.had no power to act in the case. Now then, have I not established the fact
that there is one law for the Corn-law repealer, and another law for the Chartist?
Having so far entered upon the consideration of those causes which led to the
disturbances of fast autumn, I shall now proceed to review the.whole question in its
more general bearing. Here, again, then, I am obliged to refer to matters concerning which I had before written, but which, however, have been, up to this time
little heeded, but which, henceforth, will bear a prominent part in the history of this
country.
Now, bear with me, and follow me closely-mark well my every assertion, and
say whether or not I was an unfaithful sentinel, or a false prophet.
You will recollect the shock that society received when Sir Robert Peel first
introduced his Commercial Tariff and his plan for laying a tax upon income. You
will remember that the whole press of he country, without a single exception, from
a desire to please the middle classes by defending them against the Income Tax,
and to please the aristocracy by defending them against the Property Tax, were
filled with reprobation of those two measures. You will also recollect that a large
party in the House of Commons were anxious to postpone the discussion until after
the Easter recess of 1842--tbtht Mr. Wakley read a lettei, of mine in the House of
Commons from the Northern Star newspaper, directing attention to that clause in
he Tariff which admitted live stock at various duties-this clause I then selected
as embodying the whole question of Corn-law repeal, and as calculated to unsettle,
that it may re-adjust, every other interest in this country. From that positionIhave
never swerved to this day ; but, on the contrary, all those circumstances which have
since transpired have but tended to strengtheri me in that conviction.
In the following week's Star I announced that the agricultural interest, being
thinly scattered over the face of the country, would be listless, dull, and apathetic for
a season, but that the next opposition which Sir Robert Peel would have to
-encounter would be the. opposition of the farmers and landlords of this country.
For the truth of this assertion let those events speak which are now daily occurring
in the country. I further announced at the time, that if the Tariff succeeded
Government would be mild; but ff, on the other hand- it did not succeed, persecution would be the order of the day; and I further added, that the free traders
would leave no means untried to frustrate the measure.. Now, all these things I
foretold, and all have come to pass; but having said so much about that all-important
provision of the Tariff, by which live stock and store provisions, formerly prohibited,
are now admitted into this country at a mere nominal duty, you will naturally
expect me to reason upon the subject.
In the first place, then, the greatest adv ntage which the English farmer had was
the many chances open to him for the payment of his renti if wheat was cheap,
pork, mutton, or beef may have- returned remunerating prices; but the English
market, the wealthy market of the world, being now open to every description of live
stock and provisions, the English farmer will henceforth be deprived of those various
chances. This circumstance will very naturally tend to the abstraction of capital
from agricultural pursuits, cause an. increase of agricultural paupers, and a cotemporaneous increase in saving-bank deposits, and a lwering of the interest of
money. To these two latter circumstances, which above all ohersprove general

434
distress, the mind of the country will, for a time, be directed, as a proof of great
national prosperity. This subterfuge, which, for a season, may serve the purpose of
a cunning minister, will not, however, satisfy the country in the end. I shall now
state the sophistry by which the danger to the farmer of the admission of live stock
was met by the minister, was acquiesced in by the agricultural interest, and is still
argued by professional writers. The minister said, "We have returns from all the
cattle-breeding countries in the world, and we find that in none IS THERE an
overplus." MIND, IS THERE ?
The landlords, to whom the consolation of the convicted murderer, " A long day,
my lord," is everything, therefore saw no immediate danger from the introduction
of live stock, while they knew that the process of producing wheat As quick as
compared with that of producing a fat ox, or an in-calf three year old heifer; thus
they were gulled.
The first shock of importations of various descriptions of live stock was then to be
met, and the fears of the landlords and farnlers were to be soothed upon that point
by professional writers. And now let us see how that was done.
Simuluineously with this shock, the breeders and feeders of cattle, not seeing the
time it would take to bring this provision into full operation, were seized with a
panic, and very foolishly glutted the markets with stock, of which there was really
no over-abundance. Now this fact I state fairly, in order to shew that no fair calculation as to the working of the Tariff can be made from this incidental fall of
prices. But how further did the professional writers meet the general question, and
calculate, from the condition of the first importation of live stock, what the permanent
effect of the measure was likely to be. "Oh! oh ! " said they, the one section to
appease the fears of the landlords, and the other section to arouse the indignation of
the Cotton Lords; "'Here, then, is the first experiment: cattle, imported from Spain
and other countries in Europe, sold for 101. and 111. in the English market, and
subject to an expence of 41. or 51." Now, nothing could be more absurd-nothing
could be more fallacious or ignorant than this mode of arguing. Every man of
common sense must have known that a cow must be served, that a cow must calve,
that the produce must be matured, and that mercantile arrangements, such as the
fitting up vessels for the cheap transmission of stock, must be all perfected before
this law could be brought into full operation.
Every man must be aware, that the first importation would consist of the sweepings of all countries, that speculations would be made, and that greater costs would
be incurred in merely trying a first experiment, than in carrying on a general
process aided by great competition. " How," said the professional writers, "is it
possible that the exporter of live stock can afford to tell a beast for 111. and to pay
41. 10s. for expences." Very true all this; but although a lifting Spanish " pile,"
an old " runt" of a cast Spanish plough ox, worth only Ill., cannot bear an expense
of 41. 10s., yet, as the duty upon cattle is not an ad valorem duty, but an equal tax
upon all; when arrangements are pqrfected, the fat ox of ten hundred weight, with
expense of transmission reduced by competition from 41. 10s. to 31., will very easily
bear the expense. It is hard, it is true, to pay 41. 10Os.
expense upon 111. of bad
goods as store, while ten hundred weight of butchers' meat, worth 301. or over, would
very well bear an expense of 31. In the one case the expense would be ten per cent.
upon the good article, and in the other case it would be over forty-one per cent. upon

435

The bad article. Thus, I think, I have satisfactorily explained what the ultimate
,effect of this provision will be. But I may go further; prior to the enactment of
Sir Robert Peel's Tariff, the duty upon both tallow and raw hides amounted to a
total prohibition, the duty upon tallow and rawhides being very high, whereas the
duty is now exceedingly low,(See Tariff.)
And now I pray your attention to one of the greatest commercial blunders ever
yet committed-I contend for it-that, when the plan is in perfect operation,
:oil-cake, which we now import from Holland in a raw state, will then come over
manufactured into beef, hides, and tallow. I further contend, that a well-fatted ox
will bring in him, upon him, and -about him, in tallow, hide, horns, hoofs, bones,
-and tail, to the value of the duty of 11. or upwards, and which will pay no duty
at' all, but which will be comprised in the simple twenty shillings paid for his
admission.
Thus then, we find, that the px unsaddled with any portion of
national debt, army, navy, or church, comes in to open competition with those
of England, Scotland, and Ireland, upon whose every hair there hangs some
general tax%r local burden. I shall presently shew how this Part of my subject
bears essentially upon the whole question of free-trade, of manufactures, and of
agriculture. I shall further shew, that, ultimately, this measure will have the effect
of throwing into wheat cultivation one-third more land than is at present used for
that purpose-I shall shew that it will have the effect of thereby opening a competitive labour market, which, of all other things, the tender-hearted, free-trader, weeping advocate of the pauperized multitude dreads. I shall further be able to prove,
and if I cannot establish it beyond mere argument now, the next three years' progressive movement towards the completion of the project will verify it to the letter.
This then is my assertion, that in less than three years from this date, no single
foreign corn grower will be able, without loss, to export one single quarter of foreign
grain to this country of any species, sort, or kind. It may be, and very probably
will occur, that more wheat, more oats, more barley, more rye, more peas, more
beans, more turnips, potatoes, and artificial grasses will be grown abroad, but
all these, save the wheat, will be sent over here in beef, mutton, pork,
milch cows, cheese, tallow, hides, mules, and Spanish asses; while the over produce of
wheat will be consumed by the increased number of persons engaged in the trade
of fatting cattle. Upon the other hand, with our national engagements, we will
have no protection except that which will be derived from the better cultivation
of our own soil, whereby we may beat foreigners in the production of wheat,
and ultimately the landlords, who are the legislators, and whose estates are debtors,
must and will bring about a state of things which will relieve their oxen of that ponderous weight of national debt, and their pigs of that unholy weight of religious impost, which shames both out of the society of the free-born ox and the unchristian pig.
I now proceed to shew the bearing which this law has upon the whole quesion of free trade. So long as the thing which required labour to produce it was adanitted free, and thereby the agricultural labourer was thrown out of employment, would
be compelled to augment that reserve of paupers, upon which master manufacturers
were enabled to fall back, as a means of reducing the wages of their slaves-they
were satisfied. Never did they raise their voices for the admission of that which was
produced without labour abroad, nor never yet have they contended for a system

4;Jt

which would be calculated to raise the price of labour at home, or to make the starvi ng operative independent of their own whim in their own artificial market. Hence we
find that a measure which promises to this country ten times as large an amount of
free-trade as their paltry measure would afford, is either passed over in silence, or
meets with their virtuous indignation.
When that Tariff about which I am now writing, was first propounded, I then
characterizedit as the most bold-the most manly-the most sweeping, embracing,
and statesmanlike measure that was ever yet propounded to any legislative assembly.
I designated it as a measure calculated to produce order out of chaos, justice out of
misrule, and security out of insolvency. I designated it as a measure which would
be unpalatable to those who merely contended for that species of free-trade which
was likely to subserve the purposes of the speculator and the adventurer. I designated it as a more sweeping measure than a Chartist parliament, tender of all existing interests, would be likely in the gutset to enact. I designated it as a measure
which would reduce the rent of land to the continental standard, as a measure
which would call for the total extinction, or nearly so, of the national debt and a standing army. I designated it as a measure calculated to sow the seeds of Odssension between the state and the law-church. That I was right in my estimate of this monster enactment, will be proved when the first fleet laden with foreign stock arrives in
the Downs as the first instalment of Sir Robert Peel's free-trade experiment. I say
nothing here of the Canadian Corn-bill, another " pustula" of that small-pox with
which in less than three years the face of English agriculture will be pitted.
I have now shofin, and I think successfully, that a consideration of the trials of
Lancaster could not have been fairly discussed, without fully entering into the whole
question of free-trade.
I have shown you that what ought to be a national investigation has terminated
in a paltry pauper prosecution. And however the government, the aristocracy, the
millocracy, the moneyocracy, and the shopocracy may glory in their triumph over
the mobocracy, I tell them to beware how they try a similar experiment. For myself, I may truly add, that the whole subject will form one of the brightest recollections of my life-the remembrance that I was associated with millions of oppressed
and starving men not lacking courage, but so far free from vindictiveness, that they
passed through a revolution without damage to life or property, or without making a
brutal use of that gigantic power which for, nine days at least they had at their
command.
It will teach those who would accumulate wealth at the expense of human life,
that the English working classes are not fitting instruments for them: while the result of the Trials at Lancaster, will have the beneficial tendency of inspiringthe poor
and oppressed with a becoming respect for the laws of the country when impartially
administered. Up to those trials, they knew not the value of innocence, or the worth
of a defence. They had, and not unjustly either, come to the conclusion that to be
a Chartist was to be guilty, and that to be tried merely meant the form of conviction.
In this notion they were fully justified, for I have seen exhibitions in courts of
justice, which, when truly chronicled, as they assuredly shall be, will make the actors
hide their faces for very shame.
I cannot conclude an important undertaking of this kind, without awarding that
just tribute of praise which is so unreservedly due to Mr. Roberts, the solicitor who

437
conducted the defence. It has been my lot to be engaged in the defence of prisoners charged with the highest offences, and in many of which cases, great zealand
fability was manifested by the:respective solicitors, but never in my life did I witness
such a combination of zeal, attention, anxiety, talent and power, as was evinced by
Mr. Roberts throughout the whole proceeding. It must be borne in mind that in
ordinary cases, whether of a civil or a criminal character, the defendant may make
some guess at what he will be called upon to plead to, to meet and to justify. In
the several trials at Stafford and Lancaster, however, guessing formed the rule and
not the exception, surrounded upon all sides by stratagem, and while backed by
money and ministerial power, Mr. Roberts had no other chance of escape than a
shrewd guess at that point upon which the weight of the enemy's fire would be most
heavily directed. To this consideration he bent his mind-to this point he drew
the attention of those engaged for the defence, and, after the prosecution had skirmished with shadows outside Manchester for three whole days, the Attorney-General, with all the confidence of a victorious general, led his battle and directed his
fire upon Scholefield's chapel. Here however, he discovered that the barricades had
been raised-that every loop-hole had been manned-that every point was defended,
not for the purpose of keeping him out, but for the purpose of driving him in, of
surrounding him, and of leaving him no escape. The consequence was, that the
counsel for the defence so beat him out of the triumphs he had achieved for the first
three days in his skirmishes outside, that he abandoned them all upon the fourth,
and, during the remainder of the struggle, counsel for the defence, under the direction of their briefs, held the Attorney-General so tightly to the one point that all
chance of escape was hSpeless, and to nothing but an imploring appeal to the jury
could he look even for a retreat.
Of this subterfuge he made the most, and out of fifty-nine defendants charged
with an equal amount of guilt, he succeeded in getting a verdict of guilty against
fourteen, upon just one-ninth part of the offences with which they stood charged,
whilst he also extracted the admission, that fourteen others had committed the
heinous offence of being nowhere, and of*doing nothing, on the 16th of August, and
thus ended that great national enquiry, by which Feargus O'Connor and fifty-eight
others were to have been proved guilty of something little short of high treason,
and upon which issue the crown relied for the suppression of Chartism-the acquiescence of the affrighted landlords in all the free trade experiments of their leader;
and the quiet submission of the middle classes to the payment of three per cent.
upon their incomes, the prices at which peace was to be preserved, confidence restored, and Chartism annihilated. However, by some mishap or other, the order of
things has been reversed, the landlords and the middle classes find that they have
paid too dear for their whistle, while the Chartists have discovered the important
truth, that if the law's vengeance is a dagger for the guilty, its spirit is a scabbard
for the innocent.
And now, returning my most grateful thanks to the impoverished poor,
for the voluntary aid so cheerllAly given for the defence of their brethren,
I shall complete my undertaking by a very brief contrast of the characters of
the free traders and the Chartists, and the manner in which the respective
parties conduct their affairs. The free traders are wealthy, influential, and powerful; their wealth is derived from their exclusive controul over the labour market;

438
their influence arises from their power to discharge and brand with their displeasure all those who depend upon them for an existence; and their power consists in
the use, which, as a body, they make of their wealth and their influence; they are
hard hearted, mean, and unscrupulous; resorting to and sanctioning acts as a body,
which the meanest amongst them would blush to acknowledge as an individual,
they vainly hope to accomplish by money that which can only be achieved by force
of argument; they clamour for discussion in the house of Contmons, while they appropriate the whole of their League fund to so arranging their meetings that no discussion shall take place; they rob the poor and sneer at their poverty; they cast
reproaches upon honest, indefatigable, and hard working Chartist lecturers who
receive thirty shillings a week, while their whole staff live upon the fund extracted
from the fears of their slaves. Perhaps it is a fact not generally known, that
Cobden, Bright, and, in short, the whole pioneer corps of this free trade army never
travel a mile in their vocation, or never eat a meal while on duty, without drawing,
and not sparingly, from the slave fund. While in London, they are bountiful and
generous, and live sumptuously, entertaining, feeding, and rewarding, not only their
Perregular forces, but also the clerical and lay volunteer spouters in their cause.
has been raised may
haps an illustration of the manner in which the League fund
not be uninteresting. Petitions are presented and subscriptions are said to be given
as the free will offerings of the starving operatives ; that the signatures to the petitions
are some forged, and others procured from fear, every man knows, and, that the subanecdote
scriptions are not the free will offerings of the slave class, the following
will prove :-The sum of thirty-five pounds was extracted by threats, from the fears
of the hands of one Mr. Whittaker, a manufacturer residing in the neighIn order to give an increased importance to this
bourhood of Stalybridge.
free gift, Mr. Cobden, as treasurer to the League fund, was invited to
Mr. Whittaker's works to receive the blood money. The hands upon the interestliberator
ing occasion, were mustered in the mill yard, to receive their disinterested
all becoming respect. When the little gathering was handed to the chief, their
with
mnaster asked for three cheers for Mr. Cobden, the first appeal was answered by a
yea gi'
sullen frown, when the master again said, "Cum, my lads and lasses, waint
one of the most daring of the
three cheers vur Mr. Cobden ? " "Nay," responded
off scampered
lasses, "he has our brass and that's all he wants ;" and upon so saying
the General to review the empty space.
the slave army, leaving
Now, as I know that such charges have been denied, it is but right that I should here
year, I had
state the facts upon which this anecdote is founded. In the winter of last
and for this purannounced my intention of addressing the operatives of Stalybridge,
received several letters,
pose the Town-hall was procured. Prior to my going, I had
at Ashton, a deputation from
stating the above fact, all agreeing. Upon my arrival
the circumstance,
Stalybridge waited upon me, and to which deputation I mentioned
to which the reply was,. " True, aye, bless you, true
asking them if it was true, and
a shilling for the
enough; why they take cards at two-pence amd sixpence, and
tells them, that the employer would likle them to take them
nobs; and the overseer
meant
and become members of the association, and they know dammed well what's
get the walking
-by ' would like them,' it means, that if they don't like them they'll
to-night,
ticket." "But," said one, "if you doubt it, put the question in the Hall
it." Well, I narrated the circumstance, word for
and Whittaker's men will answer

439
word, as I have written it.

I did put it to the meeting.

Mr. Whittaker's hands

were there, and Mr. Whittaker himself was, as I am informed and believe, in thee"
gallery. I asked him to contradict it; I asked the men if it was true. and the an swer
was, " Aye, it is true enough, and worse than that too." So much, then, for 1h
expression of the public mind and the manifestation of public feeling, as exhibited
in petitions and voluntary contributions; and now let us see the description of men
employed by them for the furtherance of their object by the enlightenment of the
public mind. While they taunt the Chartists with violence, treachery, and meanness, they are ever on the look out for recruits from our ranks, and whose best
qualifications are a foul mouth, an easy conscience, and a pliant mind. Their
lecturers are insolent, violent, and turbulent, because their employers are arrogant,
rebellious, and dissatisfied.
Upon the other hand, the Chartists only seek that favor for their principles which
public opinion, after free discussion, is willing to award to them. So strong is their
reliance upon rationality, that, as if by common consent, all those of doubtful,
irritable, or suspicious character are expelled by the summary process of general
censure. The Chartists render a fair account of their conduct, and require a just
one of the expenditure of their funds. They, though poor, give what they cart
contribute to the support of their cause as a free and voluntary gift. They have tor
bear all the weight of their employer's odium, while they struggle against his wile&
and contend for their own principles. To which of the two parties, then, must
justice award the victory ? That is a question which time and circumstances alonecan answer; but if coming events cast their shadow before, we may fairly infer that
the time is fast approaching when sophistry and brute force must give way to
widom and moral power. In the accomplishment of this desirable object I have
endeavoured to perform my duty; and while assailed by the vindictive slanderer
and disappointed scribbler, it will ever be my highest pride and greatest boast to Ire
able to say, that throughout my life I never travelled a mile at the expense of the
people-that I have never received the fraction of a farthing for any poor services
that I have rendered to their cause; and upon the account of my several tredisurerships, as the administrator of their funds, I stand creditor upon accounts furnished,
audited, and passed, to the amount of some hundred pounds. Let then, the disappointed, rave; the wily, fabricate; and the unscrupulous publish aught to my
dishonour; this is my answer. I am your faithful, your unpaid, and unpurchaseable friend and servant,
FEARGUS O'CONNOR,

COMMENTARY ON TRE EVIDENCE.

Iv will be necessary, in commenting upon such a bulk of evidence as that published in the preceding numbers, to keep the mind of the reader directed more to
the classification of that evidence than to a minute consideration of the testimony
of each witness. With this view, I shall arrange the whole under three distinct
heads : I shall divide the whole into three distinct parts: the first comprising what,
to the superficial reader, would appear unimportant, but, when coupled with the
far-fetched volunteer declaration of Chief Baron Lord Abinger, at Liverpool, that
the distress of the working classes was by no means as great or as general as had
been represented, added to the refusal of the Government to sanction any enquiry
into the condition of the working classes. Under the second head, I shall dispose
of "the two Government pals- Griffin and Cartledge; " and under the third, I
shall review the character of the whole body of evidence.
The casual reader may not have distinguished the different motives for this prouvution, which were exhibited in different shapes; one, I have said, and not the
ast important, being restore confidence, to silence complaint, and to justify the
gt
non-interference of Government. John Brooks, the overlooker of Platt's works, was
a witness wholly unimprtant, save and except to establish this part of the case, and
upon a. perusal of his evidence it will be seen, that not only did theAttorney-General
laju.r hard to extract eyvidj4ce of the improved wages of the working classes, but it
wil be, further seen from my cros-examination of that witness, that he would have
willigly left an exaggerated and erroneous impression upon the mind of the Court
and theJury upon this subject. Nay, until I ponderE d for a moment, I felt staggered
myself at the evidence of tlhius witness. Let us for t moment consider its bearing,
and see what the natnRal inference would have bee1 had his examination-in-chief
gone to the world uncontradicted.
With great adroitness he cogyeyed the impression, that all Platt's hands, to the
number of 300, were spinners, receiving from twenty-two shillings the lowest, to
thirty-six shillings the highest, per week. Now, so nicely balanced are the arrangements of the whole manufacturing community, that the establishment of such a
fact would have gone far to prove that all other masters were giving as good wages, as
none can much exceed their neighbours with any prospect of remuneration, while
the general tendency of such a belief would at once have cut the ground from
under the wages' party, and would have thrown the whole onus of the strike, by a
forcible turn-out of the hands, upon the Chartist body. This view of the case
flashed across my mind like lightning; and by a perusal of my cross-examination of
this witness, which will be found in number two, page 85, it will be seen, that of the
300 hands only 35 were receiving the high rate of wages, and from which enormous

444
dtduetions were made, while the remaining 265 were only receivig somewhere
about seven shillings and sixpenee per week* These 265 then, instead of constitating a part of the 300, and who it was intended to be shown had been forcibly
compelled to leave their work, were actually the dissatisfied propelling power which
forced their35 more fortunate shopmates to "stop the wheels of Government."
W It will be further seen, that this witness left the impression upon the minds of all who
heard him, that about 300 hands were receiving weekly from 3101. to 3201. over and
above, and clear of all charges and deductions : that is, that the average earning
would:have been something more than a guinea a week. When pushed, however,
upon his cross-examination, this witness was driven to the startling confession, that
the wages, that is the 3101. or 3201., was the amount paid every fortnight, and not
every week. Indeed, so important a feature would this man's uncorrected evidence
have formed in the case, and such was the impression upon the mind of the
learned Judge, that he actually took the trouble of calculating the whole question
arithmetically, and of sending the result most forcibly and 'most pointedly to the
jury. And, indeed, I have no hesitation in saying, that had that man's evidence
gone to the jury as it was intended it should go, we would every one have been
furnd guilty, and with no small color of justice, upon every count, those for riot
and all, in " the monster indictment." Perhaps, however, in no part of the intricate
and complicated proceedings did the learned Judge more powerfully convey to the
minds of the jury, and through them to the country, the impression that he was
anxious, when not trammelled by the nice distinctions of the law of evidence, to
make the investigation as full, fair, and searching as it was possible. Those who
were present while Brooks was. giving his testimony, will doubtless recollect the
stunning impression which his examination-in-chief conveyed to all, and they will
also recollect the change of countenances produced by his amended testimony.
I now come to consider the character and the value of the testimony of Griffin and
Cartledge. Griffin I shall take first. He had been dismissed from my service
as:correspondent for the Northern Star for Manchester and district; he was aware
that he had been dismissed upon the representations of Leach, Campbell, and
others; for sending incorrect, garbled, and distorted reports of facts and speeches
f6r insertion in the Northern Star. He was aware that the Chartists of Manchester had for some time previously looked upon him with no small suspicion in
consequence of an attempt to turn an important mixed meeting of Trades
and Chartists to free trade purposes. It was a notorious fact, as sworn to by
Brooke, that he had vowed vengeance against me particularly, and that he cherished
a foul and vindictive feeling against the whole Chartist body for their justifiable
condemnation of his conduct. Indeed, while he denied . the use of the threatening
words charged against him, he admitted that he had declared that he would
expose me, and, as the learned Judge very shrewdly observed when summing up
the evidence, "perhaps that was the exposure, that is the prosecution then going
on; which Griffin had designed as his mode of exposure." Can this man then
be said to have come into court as an unbiassed and impartial witness with clean
hands,?
But apart from any general motive let us calmly and philosophically examine into
the whole character of this man's evidence.
After he had volunteered to become a Government informer, several persons

442
are arrested. Cartledge among the rest. Griffin is brought before the magistrates
td substantiate the whole charge against them, the weightiest of which was the
identification of the conference delegates with the Executive placard. And now
I must solicit the undivided attention of the reader to this part of the case. Griffin,
in his depositions before the magistrates, swore, not hesitatingly, although reluctantly,
yet positively, that the corrections in the margin of the placard were in the handwriting of Cartledge. He was led to a belief by Irvin and the authorities that the
only possible means by which the League could be saved from a charge of
conspiracy was by saddling upon this placard the odium and the crime of having
given a physical turn to that which was merely intended to have been a moral
experiment upon the part of the League. Here, then, is the plot, and a deep
Griffin and Cartledge are both starving; Cartledge was Griffin's
laid one it was.
bosom friend, long associated as scribbling companions; each filling offices in
the Chartist organization, but Cartledge was not accessible to the authorities and
might have been proof against the intrigues of Griffin, had it not been for the
awkward dilemma and the dangerous position in which he placed him by
swearing that the corrections in the margin of the placard were positively in
his handwriting. It was of all things necessary to win his way to Cartledge's
imind. I have said that it might not be easy for the authorities to have succeeded
with Cartledge, but they doubtless laid the scheme which Griffin was to work.
In all such cases money is the bad man's best auxiliary. The creatures are
both poor; and, as a first step, we find Griffin in his poverty, and not thea uthorities,
We next find him
sending a sovereign to the mother-in-law of Cartledge.
visiting his comrade in that cell to which his evidence had consigned him and
where the conversation which passed may be naturally supposed to have been of
Well, Cartledge, don't be angry with me, I have but
the following character. '"
damaged you that I may be your Saviour; I have sworn that you were the corxector of the placard while it is known to the authorities that you were the bearer
,of it to the printer, and thus there is no escape for you but to choose between
the witness box and the transport-The authorities are resolved upon visiting the
crime with the very highest punishment, my evidence and that of the printer will
go to establish your guilt upon the most heinous charge, and if you escape with
transportation it will be the mildest punishment you can expect."
WVhat follows this deep laid plot. We find the two worthies subsequently in
lose communication, no other defendant appealed to but Cartledge, because for none
other had his brother traitor a like regard. With all others whom he considered of
importance he had some score to settle, some grudge to pay. I had discharged
him from his situation. Leach and Campbell he was aware were the cause of his
Griffin
removal, while the declaration of M'Douall in the conference " that if
was to report the speeches he would remain silent," was rankling in his mind.
Let then any impartial man read over the Attorney-General's examination of that
witness whose testimony it was expected would have developed the whole case,
and he will be struck, irresistibly struck, with the conviction, that the object of the
Attorney-General in his examination of this witness was to mystify and not to
elucidate the case. He examined him to a few and unimpor'tant facts, he extracted
Tom him the admission that be had sworn falsely at Manchester, when he said that
he corrections on the margin of the placard were in the handwriting of Cartledge.

443
And then the Attorney-General, to the utter astonishment of all present, stopt short
after scarcely any examination of this witness whose testimony was looked forward
to as the foundation of the whole prosecution, whereas it would appear that the
only object in producing him was to contradict upon his oath that which he had
formerly sworn to. The omission to examine this man to the full notes which he
swore he had taken of the proceedings in conference is a matter of so much importance, that I shall treat of it in another place, and at that length which it so
justly deserves.
I now come to a consideration of the evidence of Cartledge, and which, but for
,sufficient reasons, should have preceded my remarks upon the evidence of Griffin;
Cartledge, having been examined on Saturday, and Griffin not till the Monday
following. This fact of the time at which the two informers were examined, may
at first sight appear unimportant, while I undertake to show that it forms a most
;important feature in the case. Here, then, is the evidence of Cartledge, and the
:influences under which he gave it with regard to the placard.
"The ATTORNEY-GENERAL :-On Tuesday, the 16th, were you in the shop
,of Heywbod, the printer ? Yes Where was that ? In Oldham-street. How faris
,that from Noblett's ? Not far. Did Heywood put anything into your hands ? A
.roll of paper, accompanied by a note ?
" The JUDGE:--Is Hey wood a defendant ? No, my Lord. Did he desire you
to take it to any one ? To Doctor M'Douall.
" The ATTORNEY-GENERAL .- That is, Peter Murray M'Douall? Yes,
sir. Did he tell you where he (M'Douall) was ? He said I should find him at
James Leach's. Did you go to Leach's ? Yes. Who did you see there ? The
shop ,vas full at the time; I sent for M'Douall, and he came down stairs to see me.
Where did he come from ? From p-stairs. What passed between you and
M'Douall ? I gave him the roll of paper and the note, and told him the note
would explain to him what it was. Did he remain with you, or go away ? He
went up-stairs. And how long did he stay ? A few minutes. He came down
again. What did he do, or say ? ie brought down the same roll of paper, and
presented it to me, and told me to get it printed at all hazards. Did he say anything else-who it was for, or anything of that sort ? No, he did not say for whom
it was. Now, did you open the paper ? Yes. Did you know what afterwards
became of that paper-whether it is in existence or not ? I believe it to be burnt.
Why ? Because P. M. M'Douall told me so on the night of the 17th."
Now, then, there is Cartledge's evidence as to the placard, and what does it
amount to. Forgetting, for a moment, that he is an informer, and admitting, for
argument sake, the truth of the two tutored apprentices of Turner, the printer, is
there in Cartledge's evidence sufficient to convict M'Douall of the authorship of
that placard; and, without making his evidence the foundation for the evidence of
the apprentices, would the evidence of those apprentices without Cartledge's have
been sufficient to convict M'Douall upon ? If, then, it be a fact, that the evidence
of Cartledge was not only insufficient in itself, and if, from its tendency and his
position, it is to be weighed with all just suspicion, it can give no strength to the
evidence bf the apprentices; and upon which reasoning I come to the natural
conclusion, that the whole bearing of Cartledge's evidence, coupled with the omission
of the Crown to call the only man who could have given complete testimony as to
the whole transaction, leads to the probability that Cartledge himself was the author
of the placard, corrected the placard, and, subsequently, repudiated the placard,
when such course was recommended to him by Griffin as the only means of selfpreservation.

444
Now, I ,pray you calmly to consider ;this manevidence. He goes into laywood's shop. Ieywood gives him a paper, and tells him to take that paper to
M'Douall. He does not say that he was to take it back to M'Douall, but, thathe
,was to take it to M'Douall. It is clear as anything possibly can he, that Cartledge
was not a messenger employed by M'Douall; for he asks Heywood, where he
-would be likely to find M'Douall. Cartledge, as I was determinedj to drag from
.him, admitted, that for years he and Griffin had been in the habit of writing
together, and of exchanging scraps, and that the handwriting of one was well
known to the other. How, then, in the name of common sense, could Griffin have
sworn, and mark, with the observation, when pressed, ".Mind, you draw this from
me-; I did not tell it willingly"-that the corrections were all in Cartledge's hand:writing. Perhaps it may not be out of place to observe here, that it is impossible to
imagine a greater dissimilarity to exist between the handwriting of any two persons
than will be found by comparing the writing of Cartledge with that of M'Douall.
M'Douall was the best educated man of the Chartist party then at Manchester,
'1he party getting up the placard would naturally be anxious that it should appear
in a creditable style, and hence the desire to submit it to him, and hence his answer:
"' You must do the best you can with it yourselves, and when it is in print and
clearly legible I may then suggest any alteration." Which, however, he does not
appear to have done, Cartledge having undertaken that duty himself.
But now we come to the all-important consideration of time and fact. Cartledge
is examined early on Saturday. From his evidence we learn that Heywood was in
possession of the whole facts of the case. Heywood lives at Manchester. Manchester is within three hours reach of Lancaster by railroad. Forty-eight hours
olapse between the examination of Cartledge and the close of the prosecution.
Sunday intervened, Griffin was yet to be examined, and " the dies non " was allotted
4o -him for perusal of the whole evidence, and especially ofC artledge's. Heywood is
a man of business, always found at home; Government could have ensured his
presence. His presence was proved to be indispensable. The prosecutors did not
call him, and yet, we are to infer, that there has been a full, fair, and impartial
investigation of this all-important question. Every man who was tried is prepared
to admit the impartiality with which the proceedings, as far as the Court could take
cognizance, were conducted ; while, at the same time, the fact cannot be withheld,
that there may be injustice in acts of omission as well as in acts of commission, especially when those acts have the effect of perverting the course of justice, and of
withholding facts necessary for the justification of the accused. As the AttorneyGeneral asked why we did not examine Griffin to his notes, so, perhaps, he may
ask, and with equal plausibility, why we did not call Heywood and examine him.
To that, my answer is, that it was no part of the duty of the defendants to supply the
omissions or to correct the blunders of the prosecutors.
I now proceed, under the third head, to review the character of the whole
body of evidence-my space is limited, therefore my glance must be superficial. A
prosecution is instituted, from which the causes that led to all but civil war are expected to transpire. Great damage was said to have been done to the property of a
certain class, and the defendants were charged with having excited the working classes
to a performance of the mischief by their inflammatory harangues and violent pubications. Under those circumstances we were naturally led to the beliefthat the

"445
sUferers from violence (being the mot iinteriested in the prservation of their own
property and most capable of detailing any damage that it had suffered) woild have
'been the best*witnesses 'to prove the fi-st allegation, anI that persons of unsuspected
character, who were preserit at the various assemiblages of the people, would have been
called to substantiate the second charge. Sofar from ihis,however, we find a hostof
policemen produced to prove the damage done to other persons' property, while
we find the wealthiest individuals among the supposed suiterers produced for the defence, to prove not only that their property was not damaged, but that there was a
scrupulous desire upon the part of the people to evince a respect for life and property
in the very midst of turmoil and disorder. Upon the character of those witnesses,
who were called to substantiate the second charge, I shall make but a very
Brierly, the second witness called for the profew passing observations.
secution, after an examination by Sir Gregory Lewin occupying nearly
fifteen columns, and a re-examination by the Attorney-General, answered every
tittle of evidence which by possibility could have been btought against the defendants
in support of the second charge. In two columns of a cross-examination of this
witness, the reader will perceive that the whole case had been broken down, and that
the Attorney-General should have instantly abandoned this mad and precipitate
prosecution; and that such was the opinion of some of the counsel for the prosecution may be gathered from the following letter from Brierly to the iEditor of ihe
NV'orthern Star.
"I was the second witness called upon against Feargus O'Connor, and fifty-nine other prisoners.
I spoke the truth to the best of my knowledge, and wotld not tike a bribe. I was called by
Gregory Lewin a d--d scamp, and he told me if I wanted my wages, I might go to Feaigus
O'CoAnor for:them, and if I did not return 'home, he would have meiplaced among the rest of the,
prisoners, as he had better given me £100 to have remained at home, for a d-d scoundrel as I
was."
The evidence of Buckley, the self-convicted barbarian, and of the cracked man
who followed, who swore that his memory was ruined by a brain fever which, for
a considerable time, had deprived him of his senses, must be read with attention
and interest. From those witnesses we learn that some official had, just before
their being examined-read over their depositions to them; a confession which, of
itself, should have induced the Attorney-General, if not to abandon the case, at
least to strike out their evidence. I next come to the evidence of Little, the special
high constable of Hyde, and from that the reader will glean the fact, that this
man actually made out and wrote down a case for the prosecution, and proved
too much in his anxiety to catch John Leach, the ' red cat" of Hyde: in
short, that every policeman who was examined evinced feelings of strong
Then the
personal animosity against some neighbour Chartist lecturer.
evidence of every policeman, written under excitement in a plain bond, purporting to be, not the notes taken at the time or a transcript subsequently taken
from them, but a consecutive narrative of the whole proceedings written at the several
meetings-not a man in Court believed in the truth of a single statement made by
those more than accomplished, extra-finished reporters. The erasures and addenda
in Little's composition were so difficult of explanation that the attempt extracted a
blush even from him. Then the evidence of M'Cabe, the commandant of the borough staff that he was ordered to report all matters of importance, and especially
the .speeches of the Chartists, to the authorities, and that, although he came to

446

within ten yards of the tent where I was speaking, he did not take a single note of
what I said, because he did not consider it of sufficient importance to their worships.
Then the evidence of the cabbaging tailor to prove the existence of a committee of
" Public safety," the greatest feature in the whole prosecution. Then the stunning
evidence of Wilcox, to which I beg to direct especial attention, as fiom it will be
learned the true cause of the outbreak. Then, after hearing all the evidence for
nearly five days, the withdrawal of those counts by the Attorney-General in which
the defendants were charged with the very offences which the whole body of evidence
was intended to prove them guilty of. And lastly, the omission upon the part of
the crown, to call one single magistrate or person of character from any one
of the disturbed districts, while as many of those gentlemen as could be procured
were examined for the defence, and each and all triumphantly refuted any single
fact sworn to by the guardians of their lives and properties. And, in conclusion, the
impression left upon the minds of gentlemen of the highest respectability and of
large fortune in the county, who, after eight days' patient and anxious inquiry, (I
mean the jury) sent for me after the verdict had been returned, and after J had
dined, and who, upon my entering the room, addressed me thus, through their
chairman :-" Well, Mr. O'Connor, we congratulate you-we'll give you the health
of the judge." They then did me the high honour of drinking my own health,
hand in responding I said, "But, gentlemen, in my speech I told you that I would
more highly appreciate the removal of your prejudices, than your verdict of acquittalifor lack of evidence. Have I removed them ?" "YES, EVERY ONE," WAS THE
UNANIMOUS RESPONSE,

" WE CONFESS WE

HAD

STRONG

PREJUDICES AGAINST

This declaration, so honourable to
them and so cheering and consolatory to me, was more than satisfaction for all
the legal persecution I had endured had it been a thousand fold; and, indeed, so
anxious were these honest upright gentlemen not to leave a doubt behind, that the
gentleman who interrupted Mr. Parkes in the reading of his defence, said that
he merely did so lest the defendant shofild injure himself.
I have now run through so much of our case, and shall conclude this branch by
tendering my pitying thanks to the Government that persecuted me-my most
amqualified praise to the just Judge who tried me, my respect and esteem to the
gentlemen who acquitted me-my love to the valiant crew who refused all invitations to abandon the tossing vessel that we were embarkled in-for their valour in
the storm and their mildness in the calm-for their bearing, their demeanour, their
eloquence, and their courage; and my applause to the poor, who ungrudgingly
supplied the means of defence from their too scanty store; while of the Pilot (Mr.
Roberts), and the Counsel, I shall speak as they respectively merit in the fitting
place.
FEARGUS O'CONNOR.
YOU, BUT YOU HAVE REMOVED THEM ALL."

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF THflDEFENDANTS,
With the Names of the Witnesses who -speak to each, also alphabetically arranged,

with. reference to the Judge's charge.

T'he figuresfollowing the names. of the Defendants refer to the page at which the Judge's charge
will befound ; the figures after the names of the witnesses, to the page at which
the evidence will be met with.

Page
Page
385
388 Candelet, George
Clayton, William
26
Bannister, Samuel
. 76
Hanly, John
171, 371
Brierly, Henry
22
Little, Joseph
27
Buckley, James
*65
Cartledge, James
370
Haigh, Joseph
13
Nolleproaequientered
121
Allinson, James
367
Challenger, Alexander or Sandy
*388 389
Bell, Robert
116
Bannister, Samuel
*76
Longson, Abraham
54, 56
Brierly, Henry
18
Arran, John
383
Haigh, Joseph
14
Cartledge, James
127
Oliver, Joseph
73
Griffin, William
153
387
Chippendale, Joseph
Arthur, James
Clarke, Joseph
386
Cartledge, James
*127
Cooper, Thomas
Griffin, William
153
Cartledge, James
127
Bairstow, Jonathan.
382
Griffin, William
*153
Cartledge, James
126
Crossley, John
* 388, 389
Griffin, William
*153
21
Brierley, Henry
Noblett, Agnes Mary
120
Buckley, James
* 64
Noblett, Thomas
117
. 383
Beesley, William
383 Doyle, Christopher.
Bell, Robert
*116
Cartledge, James
127
Beswick, Richard
105
Griffin, William
153
Cartledge, James
*128
Holland, Henry
312
Crompton, James
48
M'Cabe, Grattan
174
. 153
Griffin, William
Booth, William
389
Moore, William
47
Buckley, James
*67
120
Noblett. Agnes Mary
Little, Joseph
30
117
Noblett, Thomas
Rhodes, Thomas
* 92
Durham, John.
* 388-389
Scott, John Robinson
61
*19
Brierly, Henry
Brooke Robert
371,383
67
Buckley', James
Barker Luke
.
139
*177
Jamnieson, Peter
Cartledge, James
*127
* 388, 389
Fenton, James
Eastwood, Mr.
"
139
*19
Brierly, Henry
Griffin, William
153
Buckley, James
67
Heap, John
*139
*177
Jamieson, Peter
Heap, William
143
Brophy, Patrick Murphy
388 Fletcher, John1 No evidence
Fraser, Thomas
387
Brierly, Henry .
16, 17, 19
Grasby, JamesJ
Cartledge, James
123
* 383
Harney, George Julian
Campbell, John
126
Cartledge, James
381
Bell, Robert
153
116
Griffin, William
Cartledge, James
126
Hill, William
383
.
Griffin, William
126
153
Cartledge, James
Noblett, Agnes Mary
. 153
120
Griffin, William

Aitken, William

53,

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF THE DEFENDANTS.

Hoyle,.John
Grfin, William
Scott, John Robinson
Johnson, George
Brierly, Henry
Haigh, Joseph
Leach,, James
Beswiek, Richard
Chambers, Samuel
Cartledge, James
Fairclough, Paul
Griffin, William
M'Mullen, Archibald
Noblett, Agnes'Mary
Noblett, Thomas
Sutton, Thomas
Leach, John
Brierly, Henry
Buckley, James
Cartledge, James
Clayton, William
Griffin, William
Hanly, John
Little, Joseph
Moore, William
Sadler, Joseph
Lees, Robert
Maiden, Matthew
Turner, Samuel
Lewis, John
Cooper, Joe
Lees, Henry
Newton, Robert
Rhodes, Thomas
Rothwell, James
Lomax, John, no evidence

M'Cartney,

Bernard

Cartledge, James
Fryar, Nathan
Griffin, William
.
Hanly, John

Nasmyth,

George

Noblett, Agnes Mary
Rowe, George
M'Douall, Peter Murray

Barlow, George
Bell, Robert
Cartledge, James

Griffin,

William

Noblett, Agnes Mary
Noblett, Thomas
Sutton, Thomas
Mahon, Thomas
Brierly, Henry
Buckley, James
Massey,,.John, no evidence

Page
383 Mooney, James

153

Page
383

;Cartledge, James

127

.

61

Griffin, William.153
SWhittam, James
.

22

Morrison, David

Cartledge, James
Fryar, Nathan
Griffin, William

14

380
106
* 320
*126
320
*153
* 102
* 120
*117
* 138
383,385, 389
22
.64
127
*126
153
*167
27
*47
42
388
* 172
*100
* 371,388
*90-91
148
*148
94-149
* 178
* 387
* 3832-385
127
98

173

383, 385

.

.

Hanly,'John

.

Nasmyth, George
Norman, John
Cartledge, James
Griffin, William

O'Connor

Feargus

122, 127
97
153
167
97

.

*
153

.

375,382

.373,

Ardell, John

.321

Bell, Robert
,
Brooke, Titns'S..Jun..
Cartledge, James
.

Drtake,

William

.115

111

.

.

Griffin, William
Halliday, James.
Hindley, James
Holland, Henry
.
Noblett, Agnes Mary
Noblett, Thomas
.
Pray, J.Clark
.

.

.
.
.

Scholefield, William

Richard

319
127

.

Farr, John

Otley,

.

320
153
319
115
312
120
117
318
308

.

.383

Cartledge, James
Griffin, William
Parkes, Samnel

127
153

.

.

.383

Cartledge, James
Griffin, William
Pilling,Richard

.

.
.

126

.153

.383,389

JBrierly, Henry.
Buckley, James
Longson, Abraham
Oliver, Joseph

17,18
65
.. 54,367

.
.

.

.

.73

Turner, Samuel .
100
153
Wilcox, James
.
145
* 167
Pitt, Thomas.
Nolle prosequi entered .
98
121
*120
Acquitted under the direction of
the Court
.
.
125
99
380, 382 Railton, Thomas
.
.
.
*137.
Cartledge, James
.
127
115

* 123
153
* 120
116
* 138
*19

Griffin, William

Ramsden, Robert

Ross, David, no

387

383

.
.

388

, .

387

evidence offered

Griffin, William

Hanly, John

383.

153

.
.

Scholefield, James
Bell, Robert
Brook, John
388
Cartledge, James
Cockshott, John

67

383

127

.

.

.

.
.
.
.

116
311
127

.312
.153

169

ALPHABETICAL

LIST OF THII DEFENDANTS.

Page

Page
;308

.

121
.125

Cartledge, James
Griffin, William

.

127
153

.

'Smith, Thomas Browne, no evideuce

Stephenson,

167
Hanly, John
61
.
Scott, John Robinson
Taylor, James
No evidence
Thornton,John
.
Wilde, John
22
.
Brierly, Henry
.68
Buckley, James
Verdict of acquittal taken 81, 125
387
Nollcprosequi entered . 121

388-389

William.

Brierly, Henry
Euokley, James
,Jamieson, Peter
Little, Joseph
.
Storah, Thomas
Brierly, 1~enry

Taylor, Frederick Augustus.385

310

Northcote, John
Scholefieki, 'Wiim
Scholefield, William
Nolleprosequi entered
Verdict of acquittal
Skevington, James

.
.

18-19-22
64
177
.
-29

.
.
.

.17

Woodruffe, William

Haigh, Joseph
Hanly, John
.
'Woolfenden, Albert
Brierly, Henry
389
Buckley, JamesHanly, John

385-386

.

.

.
.

.

.
.
.

386

13-14
167
385-86
.
23
67
.167

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES,
WITH

THE

PAGE

AT

WHICH

Ardell, John, clerk.

THEIR EVIDENCE

321

Bannister, Samuel, chief-constable of police,
Preston

76

..

Barker, Luke, schoolmaster

. -139

Barker, William, journeyman tailor
.
177
Barlow, George, an apprentice
137
Barrington, Thomas, governor of Stockport
workhouse
.
4
Beattie, Thomas, called but not examined . 39
Bell, Robert, extra policeman
115
Bentley, William, policeman

[64

.

Beswick, Richard, chief superintendent of
police, Manchester.
104
Bradshaw, James, millowner
89
Brierly,
factory operative
.
16

Henry,

Brook, John,

cabinetmaker

311

Brooke, Titus S. Jun., druggist
319
Brook, John, book-keeper and manager to
Mr. Platt
.
83
Buckley, James,
61

WILL BE

FOUND.

Kershaw, James, mayor of Manchester.

Page
317

148
Little, Joseph, special high constable of
Hyde
.
27, 96
Longson, Abraham, police constable of Stockport
.53
Lees, Henry.

M'Cabe, Grattan, superintendent of police
at Burnley.
174
M'Mullen, Archibald, inspector of Manches101
ter police force
172
Maiden, Matthew, conatableof Ashton
.
46
Moore, William,. dresser
.
Nasmyth, George, occupier of. Bridgewater
forge
.97
Newton, Robert, deputy constable of Ashton
under Lyne
148
173
Newton, Samuel.
120
Noblett, Agnes Mary

Thomas

116

Cartledge, James
.
121-125
Chambers, Samuel, carpenter
320
Chappell, alderman George Boyle
.
316
Clayton, William, constable
26
Cockshott, John, butcher
.
312
Cooper, Joe, cotton-spinner
.
.
90
Crompton, James, constable of Stockport . 48

Northcote, John, Printer.

310

Drake, William

Rhodes, Henry, steam-loom weaver
Rhodes, Thomas, cotton manufacturer
Roberts, George, book-keeper
Rothwell, James
Rowe, George, coachman

-

Eastwood, Mr., solicitor

111

-

Fairclough, Paul, fruiterer
.,
Fair, John, steward to Mr. O'Connor
Faraday, Silvester, constable
Fryar, Nathan, blacksmith

-

139
320
ib.
63
97

Noblett,

Oliver, Joseph, overlooker" at Robinson's
mill
.

179
92, 148
178
178
-99

Sadler, Joseph, police officer
Scholefield, William, schoolmaster
Griffin, William, reporter
153 Scott, John Robinson
Haigh, Joseph, milkman
, 13 Shepherd, Edwin, superintendent of police
at Blackburn
Halliday, James, spinner
.- 319
.
Hanley, John, reporter166 Shepley, Samuel, cotton spinner
.
Storack, Charles, a designer
Heap, John, constable
.Heap, William, late farmer.
143 Sutton, Thomas, an apprentice
Hibbert, Joseph, clerk to the magistrates of
-81
Taylor, Rev. Jno.
Hyde
.
.
82-95 Thorpe, Issachar, manager of print-works
Hindley, James, driver of a fly
115 Turner, Samuel, farmer
.
Holland, Henry, block cutter
312
Whittam, James.
Wilcox, James.144

139-144

0

Jameso,

Pter

talo

176

73

Potter, Sir Thomas, magistrate of Manches313
.
ter
318
Pray, Isaac Clarke

41
308
61
152
147
174
138
175
100
173

INDEX
TO THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS REFERRED

.

Acquittal of

.

.

Page.
257

.

Allinson, John, Evidence against him

264

.

.

of

217

.

.

Mooney and Aitkin

.

328

.

.

Bairstow, Jonathan, Speech of
Beesley, William, Speech of

.

Robert, Papers taken from him
when arrested
.
141, 142
Cartledge, James, Argument on his being
admitted as a witness for prose.

O'Connor, Feargus, Objection made by him
to Cartledge's evidence being received

.

121-125
. 121

.

Doyle, Christopher, Speech of

Irwin

.

.

*

124
.

His speech in defence

2

.

.

Complaint made by him against

Acquitted by direction of the Court 125
Defendants, List of

209

Northern Star newspaper, Extracts from
put in and read .
113, 321,328

264

Brooke,

cution
.
Nolle prosequi entered .

229

National Charter Association, Address of the
Executive Committee of
. 96

271

.

.

Durham

199

.

.

Murphy, Mr., Sergeant: His speech on behalf of M'Douall, Railton, and

Baines, Mr., Speech of, in defence of Scholefield

277

.

-

.
149, 150
M'Cartney, Bernard, Speech of
257
McOubrey, Mr., Speech of in Behalf of

3
Attorney-General, The, opening Speech of
Answer to Objection raised against
the Examination of Cartledge . 124
Reply of

134, 136

.

Lewis, John, Letters from, read

124

.

age.

PL

Speech of, in defence of Fenton and
Stephenson

THE FOREGOING REPORT;

Leach, James, Speech of

.

.

IN

Lancashire, South, Address of the delegates

Atherton, Mr., Objection urged by him
dgainst the Examination of Cart.
ledge

TO

266

Otley, Richard, Speech of

151

285

.

245

.

Pilling, Richard, Speech of.

248

Pitt, Thomas, Nolle prosequi entered for

121
Acquitted by direction of the Court 125
Proclamation, The Queen's
.
32
Brooke
.
.
184 Rolfe, Baron Mr., Letter to
i
His opinion on the right to examine
Evening Starnewspaper, Extract from, read 134
Cartledge
.
.
•
125
Harney, George Julian, Speech of
. 231
His note of the objection raised to his
Hunt's Monument, placard announcing
examination
*
•
. ib.

Dundas, Mr., objection taken by him to the
examination of Cartledge
. 121
His speech on behalf of Robert

opening of

.

.

Placard postponing same
Indictment, abstract of
copy of

.

.
.

.

Introduction
Irwin, Mr., Complaint made against him
Johnson, George, Speech of
Acquittal of .
Jury, The, Names of

107

108,309-10
215-16
352-6
"

V.

151
255
. 256
4

Summing up of

.

.

.

.

357

Scholefield, William, nolleprosequi entered 121
Acquitted by direction of, the
Court

*

*

.

125

Thornton, John, Acquittal of

.

229

Wilde, John, Verdict of acquittal taken

.

81

.

121

Nolleprosequi entered

.

Acquitted by direction of the Court

125

Woolfenden, Albert, His speech in defence

275

LIST

OF PLACES

At which Meetings, &c..) were held., with the names of the Witn 'esses, and page of
the Report at which their evidence will be found.

Ashton-under-Lyne.'-Brierly, 21 ; Haigh, 13; Hyde.-Brierly, 16, 21 ; Buckley, 66; Clayton,
Maiden, 172; Newton, 173; Storack, 174;
26.; Hibbert, 82; Little, 27, 31, 96.
Turner, 100; Wilcox, 144.

Basinstone.-Heap, William, 143.

Manchester.-Beswick, 104; Cartledge, 122;
Chappell, 316; Griffin, 164; Kershaw, 317;
M'Mullen-, 101, 104; Potter, 313.

Blackburn.-Shepherd, 152.

Marple near Stockport.-Moore, 46; Cromp-

Baeup.-Faraday, 63.

BridgewaterFoundry near Worsley.-Nasmyth,
97; ryar 97,98.Oldham

ton, 48.
.- Cartledge, 121.

JBrookfteld near Glossop,'-Shepley, 147; Rhodes,
92.

Orchard The (Preston) .- Bannister, 76,

Busrnley.-Holland, 312; M'Cabe, 174.

Peak Forest Canal.-Crompton, 49.

Carleton.-Whittam, 173.

Preston.-Bannister, 76.

Cave of the Adulamites.-Brfierly, 20.
Charlestown Meeting Room.-Haighj 13; Wilcox, 145.
Ckisorthnea
Glorop.Cooer,6.
Colne.-Holland, 312.
Dalton.-Rothwell,,178.
Denton.--Buckley, 66.
Duckenfield.-Brierley,17; Oliver, 73; Rhodes,
179, Thorpe, 176.

Rccles.-Fryar, 98; Nasmyth, 97.
Glossop.-Brierly,' 23; Cooper, 96; Rotliwell,
178.
GranbyRow Fields.'-Beswick, 104,;,M'Mullen,

It)? TurerWaterloo

.Rochdale.-Bentley, 64.
Royton.-Scott, 61.
Stalyridge.-Brierly, 16, 22;

Brooks, 83;

Buckley, 64, 65; Jamieson, 176; Thorpe, .176.
Stockport.-Barrington,

45;

Bradshaw, 89;

Crompton, 48; Longson, 53, 60; Sadler,
41.
Thacker's Ground or Foundry.-Buckley, 65;
Haigh, 13, 14; Oliver, 74 ; Turner, 100;
Wlo,14

Todmorden.-JIeap, John, 144; Heap, William,
143.
Road near, Stockport.-Longson, 53.

HM'gh;,The.--Brierly, 16,'19,t-20,22;]Buckley,67.'
Hal Gren.Olier,73.Wedensoegk Green orMdttram-foord.-Brierly,
ItOU 7bwn.-Ttirner, 106.

20; Buckley, 64; Litt~-27, 31;. Rkods,
92, 94.

ERRATA.
Page
2. 7th line from top, 1st and 2nd
for 'Bairstow, John,' read 'Bairstow,
Jonathan.'-For 'Morris, David,' read
'Morrison.'
18. 7th line from top, 2nd column-read
'There is an end of your point, Mr.
Dundas.'
25. 17th line, 2nd column-insert
O'CONNOR :-This, my Lord,' &c.
30. 5 lines from bottom, 1st column-insert
'Mr. POLLOCK :-Who spoke,' &c.
35. 18 lines from bottom, 1st
'Mr. O'CONNOR :-What day,' &c.
56. 5th line, 2nd column-read 'one of the
first. When Sawyer and me went up
stairs, they dissolved,' &c.
57. Line 44, 2nd column-insert 'Mr. DUNDAS :-My Lord,' &c.
70. Line 16, 1st column-insert 'Mr. DUNDAS.-Were you,' &c. Line 1, 2nd
column-for 'your' read 'that'
106. Line 18, 1st column-inse t' Tb. ATO1 ,
NEY-GENERAL :- Youtook, also,'
&c.
119. Line 26, 1st column-'The JUDGE:Who is that?
O'CONNOR:-

column-

'Mr.

column-insert

Page
162. Line48, 1st column-insert'Mr. O'CONNOR :-But to which,' &c.
166. Line 42, 1st column-for 'Stanley' read

'Hanly.'

127.

207.

217.

241.

: 369n

132.
133.
140.

-

370.

Mr.

column-' Who
seconded, &c. Mr. O'Connor.'
Line 35, 2nd column-New paragraph:Mr. O'CONNOR :--A, &c.
Line 27,
1st column-for ' sent' read
' saw.'
Line 26, 2nd column-for ' not' read 'no

doubt.'
143. Line 32, 2nd column-read' Did you give
up farming or did it give up you ?'
146. Line 41, 1st
'Highley' read
' Shipley.' Line 42, 1st
'Higliley' read 'Hildyard.'
148. Line 11, 2nd
' indited ', read
' indicted.' Line 12, 2nd
Leach' read' Lewis.'

column-for

column-for

column-for
column-for

read

column-for

'James and' read
'James Fenton and.'
Last line,1st column-for 'detached 'read
'attached.' Line 9, 2nd
'tbs' read' than.'I

Line4from

bottom, 2nd columnfor p.9'

read' p. 115.'

Last

line,

2nd column-

' pp. 10,15,' read 'pp.115, 116.'

column-'

Mr. O'CONNOR :
Hill,' &c. Line 43, 2nd

Line 9, 1st

column-for 'votes'

column-for

Doyle.'

present?

Line 26, 2nd

' notes.'

The ATTOR- 371.
NEY-GENERAL :-Who also were 372.

Line 16, 1st

The WIT.

177. Line 9, 2nd columnfor 'sowing' read
sewing.'
188. Lines 46-54, 2nd column--for'Mr.' read
'Mc.'
196. Line 40, 1st column-for 'wip' read
' whip.'
Line 14, 2nd column-new
paragraph, 'I believe it is,' &c.

Mr.

Christopher

[insert -'

Line 47,
Lord,' &c.

NESS :-My

374.

column-for p. 28'read 'p.
120.'
Line 42,2nd column-for 'for' read 'far.'
Line 33, 1st column-for ' p. 104' read
' p. 179.'
The following passage " I must say I never heard much of Mr. O'Connor's
Line 1, 1st

speeches

in that

place-(the

House of

Commons)-where I once sat with him.
At some public meetings out of doors I
may have heard him, but I must take
my account of his speeches from the evidence," has been by some means wholly
transposed-it should read thus :-' The
learned Judge said, that although he had
not heard any of the public harangues of
Mr.

O'Connor, yet, as an appeal had been

made to him, he must say, that he had
heard his speeches ins another_ place,
which always appeared to be characterised by zeal and energy.'

AND CO. MINTERS
)A'GOlA'
1
GREAT WflWMIJ.L STREET] HAY GAJUKE1
1 LO1DO~

This book is a preservation facsimile produced for
the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
It is made in compliance with copyright law
and produced on acid-free archival
60# book weight paper
which meets the requirements of
ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (permanence of paper).
Preservation facsimile printing and binding
by
Northern Micrographics
Brookhaven Bindery
La Crosse, Wisconsin
2009